Disposed

M/S.Durga Stone Crushing Unit v. Ao, Uco Bank

Orissa HC4 Sept 2017WP(C)/16174/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged recovery notices under SARFAESI Act seeking One Time Settlement. Court directed Petitioner to deposit Rs.15 lakh; if done, Bank must consider settlement per guidelines. Court stayed coercive action pending Bank's decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to deposit Rs.15 lakh; Bank to consider O.T.S. application; stay on coercive action pending decision.

This writ petition has been filed challenging the demand notic e dated 21.9.2015 (Annexure-1) and the subsequent possession notice dated 22.12.2015 (Annexure -2), issued by the opposite parties-Bank, under Sections 13(2) and (4) of the SARFAESI Act, 20 02, for recovery of the loan dues, with a further prayer to direct the Bank to settle the loan account of the petitioner by way of One Time Settlement.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had availed a Term loan of Rs.75.00 lakh and a Cash Credit loan of Rs.15.00 lakh from the opp osite parties-Bank in the year 2011, for business purpose. It is submitted that though the pe titioner has repaid some amounts, due to financial hardship, he could not repay the balance lo an amount in time for which, the Bank has initiated proceeding against him under the provision s of SARFAESI Act. It is submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a subst antial amount with the Bank towards down payment and make an application for one time settleme nt/rephasement of the balance loan amount, which may be considered by the Bank sympathetically and as has been done in similar other cases.

Learned counsel for the Bank-opposite parties on instructions submits that the present loan dues outstanding against the petitioner is about Rs.91.00 lakh. It is fairly submitted that if the petitioner deposits a substantial amount with the Bank towa rds down payment and make an application for one time settlement/rephasement of the balance lo an amount, the Bank shall consider the same in terms of its existing guidelines and as has bee n done in similar other cases.

Considering the submissions made, it is directed that in the event the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- (rupees fifteen lakh) with the Bank within four weeks hence along with an application for one time settlement/ reph asement of the balance loan amount, the Bank shall consider the same in terms of its existing guidelines and as has been done in similar other cases and take a decision thereon within four weeks thereafter.

Till a final decision is taken by the Bank on the application of the petitioner for one time settlement/ rephasement, no coercive action shall be taken agai nst the petitioner in respect of the mortgaged property in question, pursuant to the notices u nder Annexures-1 and 2 to the writ petition.

It is needless to say that if the petitioner does not deposit the amount as directed above within the stipulated period or defaults in making payment of the subsequent installments to be fixed by the Bank after rephasement, the Bank shall be at liber ty to take recourse to such steps as provided in law.

M/S.Durga Stone Crushing Unit v. Ao, Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Durga Stone Crushing Unit v. Ao, Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajita Ku.Sahoo Vs Subani Bisoi

Muralidhar Sahoo Vs a.O., United Bank of India

Bikram Keshari Binod Vs State of Odisha

Dibyasingh Singh Vs Union of India

Sharat Nayak@Sharat Ku.Nayak Vs Collector and D.M.,Bhadrak

Sagarika Jena Vs Manager,Uco Bank