Disposed¶28

Influx Security Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Chief Manager State Bank of India,Bhubaneswar

Orissa HC5 Feb 2025WP(C)/684/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SARFAESI Act; Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002; 90 days deposit of auction amount; extension of time auction purchaser; SA No.186 of 2023; Debts Recovery Tribunals Odisha Cuttack; early disposal of SA; e-auction sale notices 18.11.2023, 30.11.2023, 24.12.2024; scheduled auction 30.11.2024; amendment application to implead auction purchaser; State Bank of India; writ petition disposed with observation; High Court of Orissa; W.P.(C) 684 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

This Court is not in a position to entertain the petitioner's prayer for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023. ¶28

Influx Security Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chief Manager… — Banking and Recovery | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the P.O., Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to hear and dispose of SA No.186 of 2023 within a period of four weeks (early disposal of the SA), the writ petition having been confined to prayer No.(i).

¶18

Court's answer

This Court is not in a position to entertain the petitioner's prayer for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

SA No.186 of 2023 is not ready for hearing, because the petitioner therein has prayed for time to file an amendment application to implead the auction purchaser as a party.

¶27

Key takeaways

In view of the specific provision of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, extension beyond 90 days to deposit the balance auction amount cannot be granted (stated in passing while noting the auction purchaser's request for extension of time).obiter¶27
The writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the petitioner, if so advised, may file an application for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023 when the matter becomes ready for hearing.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C). No.684 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa, order dated 05.02.2025; K.R. Mohapatra and S.K. Mishra, JJ.) - Influx Security Services Private Limited v. Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Bhubaneswar and others. The writ petition, initially seeking directions to the P.O., Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) for disposal of SA No.186 of 2023 within four weeks and reliefs against the e-auction under the SARFAESI Act, was confined at the hearing to prayer No.(i) alone (early disposal of the SA pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunals, Odisha, Cuttack). State Bank of India informed the Court that the daughter of one of the petitioner's Directors had been adjudged the successful bidder in the auction, had deposited the initial auction amount, and had sought extension of time to deposit the balance; the Court observed that, in view of the specific provision of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, extension beyond 90 days to deposit the rest of the amount cannot be granted. Since the petitioner in the SA had prayed for time to file an amendment application to implead the auction purchaser as a party, the SA was held not ready for hearing. The Court declined to entertain the prayer for early disposal and disposed of the writ petition with an observation that the petitioner, if so advised, may file an application for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023 when the matter becomes ready for hearing.

¶1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 06-Feb-2025 10:20:26

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶3

W.P.(C). NO.684 OF 2025

¶4

Influx Security Services Private Limited, Ganjam

¶5

…. Petitioner

¶6

Mr. Prashanta Kumar Nayak, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

Chief Manager, State Bank of India, …. Opp. Parties Bhubaneswar and others

¶9

Mr. Subrat Mishra, Advocate (For State Bank of India)

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

Order No.

05.02.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶16

Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following relief:

¶17

“Under these circumstances, the petitioner most humbly prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to-

¶18

i. Direct the Learned P.O., Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to take immediate and appropriate steps to hear and dispose of the matter within a period of 4 weeks, so that the petitioner may be afforded an expeditious resolution of the issue in line with the directions of this Hon'ble Court.

¶19

ii. Direct the respondent Bank to forthwith refrain from proceeding with the auction sale under the SARFAESI Act, including the issuance of any further sale notices, until the matter is resolved by the Tribunal and the applicants have been given a fair opportunity to settle the outstanding loan. iii. Invalidate the e-auction sale notices issued on 18.11.2023, 30.11.2023, and 24.12.2024, including the scheduled auction date of 30.11.2024, on the grounds of violation of the interim orders passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal, and in violation of the sub-judice status of the matter.

¶20

iv. Direct the respondent Bank to immediately update the loan account, taking into consideration the payments made by the applicants in compliance with the Tribunal's order, and refrain from making any further attempts to auction the property without the Tribunal's explicit sanction.

¶21

v. And for this act of kindness, the petitioners shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

¶22

Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset,

¶23

submits that the Petitioner does not want to press the prayer Nos.ii, iii and iv and confines the writ petition to prayer No.(i) only. It is

¶24

Page 1 of 2

¶25

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 06-Feb-2025 10:20:26

¶26

his submission that a direction may be issued for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023 pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunals, Odisha, Cuttack. It is further submitted that the matter is ready for hearing. The Petitioner has also deposited a substantial amount in the loan account. Hence, interest of justice will be best served, if the SA is disposed of at an early date.

¶27

Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of State Bank of India-Opposite Party and underrates to file Vakalatnama in course of the day. It is his submission that daughter of one of the Directors of the PetitionerCompany has been adjudged as the successful bidder of the property in question. After depositing the initial auction amount, she prayed for extension of time to deposit the rest of the amount. 5. In view of the specific provision of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, extension beyond 90 days to deposit the rest of the amount cannot be granted. However, the Petitioner in SA No.186 of 2023 has prayed for time to file an amendment application to implead the auction purchaser as a party. As such, SA No.186 of 2023 is not ready for hearing.

¶28

In view of the submissions made above, this Court is not in a position to entertain the prayer made by Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with an observation that the Petitioner, if so advised, may file an application for early disposal of SA No.186 of 2023 when the matter becomes ready for hearing.

¶29

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶30

(S.K.Mishra) Judge

¶31

Rojalin

¶32

Page 2 of 2

Influx Security Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Chief Manager State Bank of India,Bhubaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Influx Security Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Chief Manager State Bank of India,Bhubaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Jambubati Filing Station Vs Punjab National Bank

Pradip Kumar Dash Vs the Authorised Officer, Axis Bank Ltd.,Khurda

Rasida Bibi Vs Regional Manager, Union Bank of India

Kalpataru Samal Vs a.O.-Cum-B.M.,State Bank of India

M/S Benzfab Technologies Pvt.Ltd. Vs M/S.Edac Engineering Ltd.

Umakanta Behera Vs Allahabad Bank