Disposed

Banamali Parida v. Ao,Odisha Gramya Bank,Puri

Orissa HC11 Sept 2017WP(C)/4251/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging a possession notice. The court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.5 lakhs and apply for One Time Settlement or rephasing within four weeks. Pending this, no coercive action should be taken against the petitioner. Failure to comply would allow the bank to proceed as per law.

What did the court decide?

Directs petitioner to deposit Rs.5 lakhs and apply for One Time Settlement/repisement within four weeks; no coercive action till final decision.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tuna Sahu, learned c ounsel appearing for opposite party nos.1 and 2-Bank. This writ petition has been filed challenging the possession notice da ted 16.02.2016 (Annexure-3) for taking possession of the mortgaged property for recovery of th e loan dues.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had ava iled a cash credit loan of Rs.12.90 lakhs from the opposite party nos.1 and 2-Bank in the year 2010 for business purpose. It is submitted that though the petitioner had paid some amount, d ue to financial stringency, he could not repay the balance amount for which the opposite parti es-Bank has initiated the action under the SARFAESI Act. It is further submitted that the peti tioner is ready and willing to make payment of a substantial amount towards down payment again st his outstanding loan account and shall apply for One Time Settlement and/or rephasement as per the guidelines of the Bank.

Learned counsel for opposite parties-Bank submits that the present out standing loan dues of the petitioner is about Rs.22.38 lakhs after adjustment of the payment a lready made. It is fairly submitted that if the petitioner by depositing a substantial amount again makes an application for One Time Settlement, the Bank shall consider the same sympathet ically as per the existing guidelines of the Bank and as has been done in other similar cases. Considering the submissions made, it is directed that in the event the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-(rupees five lakhs) with the opposite party nos .1 and 2-Bank within four weeks hence and files an application for One Time Settlement/comprom ise/ rephasement of the loan account, the same shall be considered by the Bank sympathetically in terms of its existing scheme and as has been done in similar other cases and final decisio n shall be taken thereon within a period of four weeks thereafter.

It is needless to say that if the petitioner does not comply with the direction as specified above or defaults in making payment of the subsequent instalments as wo uld be fixed by the Bank, the Bank shall be at liberty to take recourse to such steps as provi ded in law.

Banamali Parida v. Ao,Odisha Gramya Bank,Puri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banamali Parida v. Ao,Odisha Gramya Bank,Puri

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

Bharat K.Mohanty Vs RBI

Kedar Ch.Sarangi Vs Collector-Cum-Dm,Cuttack

Surjit Sahoo Vs B.M.,S.B.I

Lalita Naik Vs State of Orissa

Saroj Devi Swami Vs Uco Bank,Sambalpur Branch

Mukari Majhi Vs State of Orissa