Disposed

Sujeet Kumar@Sujit Kumar Sharm v. the Punjab National Bank andORS

Patna HC14 Oct 2014CWJC/10310/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of two identical writ petitions challenging notices under the SARFAESI Act and an Authorized Officer's rejection of a repayment plan. The Court allowed partial relief by granting time to pay Rs. 15 lakcs plus interest but refused extension beyond the lay date, permitting immediate auction upon default.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of notice and orders allowed on terms: payment of Rs. 15 lacs + interest by 15.04.2015; refusal of extension beyond this date; liberty to Bank to auction on default.

Sujeet Kumar@Sujit Kumar Sharm Vs the Punjab National… — Banking and Recovery | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10310 of 2009

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Sujeet Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Sharma, son of Tarni Prasad Sharma, resident of Bari Bazar, P.O. Munger, P.S. Munger, Dist. Munger.

¶4

Tarni Prasad Sharma, son of late Rameshwar Prasad Sharma, resident of Mohalla Kali Taziya Dilawarpur Ice Factory Bekapur, Munger, Dist. Munger.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Punjab National Bank through Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Darbhanga at Laheriasarai.

¶8

The Senior Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Munger Branch, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Munger.

¶9

The Authorized Officer/Chief Manager, Punjab Natinal Bank, Circle Office, Darbhanga.

¶10

The Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, Regional Office, Darbhanga at Laheriasarai.

¶11

.... .... Respondent/s

¶12

======================================================

¶13

with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10326 of 2009

¶14

======================================================

¶15

Rajeev Kumar Sharma son of Sri Tarni Prasad Sharma, Resident of Mohalla Kali Tazia Dilawarpur, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Munger.

¶16

Tarni Prasad Sharma, son of late Rameshwar Prasad Sharma, resident of Mohalla Kali Taziya Ice Factory Bekapur Munger, Dist. Munger.

¶17

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶18

Versus

¶19

The Punjab National Bank through Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Darbhanga at Laheriasarai.

¶20

The Senior Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank Munger Branch, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Munger.

¶21

The Authorized Officer/Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, Darbhanga.

¶22

The Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, Regional Office, Darbhanga at Laheriasarai.

¶23

.... .... Respondent/s

¶24

====================================================== Appearance : (In CWJC No.10310 of 2009) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Adv. Mr. Tarkeshwar Prasad Verma, Adv. For the Bank : Mr. Sharad Kumar Siha, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Adv. (In CWJC No.10326 of 2009) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Adv. Mr. Tarkeshwar Prasad Verma, Adv. For the Bank : Mr. Sharad Kumar Siha, Adv.

¶25

Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Adv.

¶26

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.10310 of 2009 (7) dt.14-10-2014

¶28

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Heard Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in both the cases as also Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, learned for the Punjab National Bank hereinafter referred to as the Bank as with regard to the following identical relief prayed in these writ applications:-

¶31

7 14-10-2014

¶32

"For quashing the notice dated 13.5.09 (Annexure-1 and 2) issued under SARFAESI Act and the orders of Authorized officer as contained in Annexures 5 and 6 whereby, the Authorized Officer rejected the petitioners; request to repay the out standing dues in instalments and also for directing the Respondent-Authorities to realise the out standing dues as proposed by the petitioners and also for restraining them from taking any coercive step for realization of the outstanding dues as mentioned in the notice itself."

¶33

While many issues have been raised in these two writ

¶34

applications, Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, at the end of the day, would not like to dispute that the petitioners had taken loan from the Bank and are liable to pay the amount by way of fulfilling their commitment to the loan taken by them. Mr. Trivedi, however, submits that in fact both the writ applications, total amount of dues involved was Rs. 44 lacs and odds and now when the petitioners have already started making payment to the Bank, the dues have

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.10310 of 2009 (7) dt.14-10-2014

¶36

¶37

been reduced to Rs. 15 lac approximately and that amount will also be paid within a period of seven months from today by the petitioners to the Bank without fail.

¶38

Learned counsel for the Bank has got no objection to such offer and prayer of Mr. Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners but, he has only put a rider that the Bank cannot wait endlessly for recovery of its dues amount specially when the petitioners have also not filed their reply to the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act which would mean they have also admitted their liability towards loan taken by them from the Bank. The time period of seven months therefore as prayed for the petitioners should be firm so that the Bank can recover the amount within the fixed schedule of time and, in no event, the petitioners should be allowed any further time in making full and final payment of their dues amount of the loan, in question, beyond a period of seven months from today.

¶39

In that view of the matter, both the writ applications are disposed of with the following observations and directions:-

¶40

(i) The payment of dues amount of Rs. 15 lac approximately along with its interest as may be found payable by the Bank must be paid by the petitioners on or before 15th of April, 2015.

¶41

(ii) It is It is also made clear that no extension of time

¶42

Patna High Court CWJC No.10310 of 2009 (7) dt.14-10-2014

¶43

¶44

shall be given to the petitioners by this Court for payment of the dues amount beyond 15th of April, 2015. (iii) In the event the petitioners fail to pay the amount of loan along with the interest by 15th of April, 2015, the Bank shall be at liberty to straightway take steps for putting the property, in question, on auction for its sale without going to any other details or procedure as the petitioners themselves want this settlement by way of an undertaking given to this Court through their counsel.

¶45

With the aforementioned observation and directions, both the writ applications are disposed of.

¶46

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J)

¶47

Rishi/-

¶48

Sujeet Kumar@Sujit Kumar Sharm v. the Punjab National Bank andORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujeet Kumar@Sujit Kumar Sharm v. the Punjab National Bank andORS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Ganesh Rice Mill Vs The Food Corporation Of India and Ors.

Kumari Shweta Sinha and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Balram Kumar Vs The Power Grid Corporation India Ltd. and Ors.

Kameshwar Prasad Vs The Regional Manager State Bank Of India and Ors.

Rajeev Kumar Sharma and Anr. Vs the Punjab National Bank andORS

Ranjan Kumar Mishra Vs The Union Of India and Ors.