Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/6679/2008 5/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6679 of 2008
=========================================================
NIMORA
TRADERS - Petitioner(s)
Versus
SHREE
BHAVNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MP SHAH for
Petitioner(s) : 1,MS. KRUTI M SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR RJ
OZA for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date
: 08/10/2008
ORAL
ORDER
The
petitioner by this petition has prayed for the various relief.
However, upon hearing learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner,
it appears that the principal grievance on the part of the
petitioner is that after petitioner shown the willingness of handing
over the possession of the premises and desire to get the money
realised by the sale of the property, as the bank did not take
action well in time, bank should not be permitted to charge interest
on the unpaid amount. Therefore, it has been submitted on behalf of
the petitioner that if the said amount of interest after declaration
of the account as NPA is excluded, there may be surplus amount
available with the bank, which the petitioner may receive.
Whereas
on behalf of the respondent bank, it has been submitted that the
actual physical possession is not handed over, but if the petitioner
hand-overs the actual physical possession, bank will make an attempt
to sale the property and at the time of appropriation of the money,
the petitioner may make representation and the bank will consider
the same in accordance with law and also as per the policy
prevailing of the bank from time to time.
In
above view of the matter, it appear that if the petitioner desirous
to hand over the possession of the property to the bank for
realisation of the dues under the Securitisation and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Securitisation Act’), the same
should encourage by the bank. The learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioner declared before the Court that the petitioner is ready to
hand over the possession within a period, as may be ordered by this
Court.
Hence,
it appears that following directions shall meet with the ends of
justice:
A)
The petitioner shall hand over the actual physical possession of the
property to the respondent bank within a period of one month i.e. in
any case on or before 10.11.2008.
B)
The bank shall take over the possession after drawing proper
Panchnama.
C)
The bank shall also take immediate steps for disposal of the property
under the Securitisation Act, read with the rules and shall complete
the process within a period of three months from the receipt of the
actual physical possession.
D)
At the time when the property is to be sold by the bank and the
offers are to be invited, it would be open to the petitioner to offer
buyer, if available and who is ready to offer higher price of the
property.
E)
The bank shall make an attempt to dispose of the property by
realising maximum price of the property.
F)
After process of the sale is completed, within a period of one week
thereafter, it would be open to the petitioner to make detailed
representation to the respondent bank for extending benefit of waiver
of interest, as per the policy of the bank and as per the guideline
of the RBI prevailing from time to time, and the petitioner may also
request the bank to consider the relaxation in the interest, if
permissible in law after declaration of the account as NPA.
G)
The bank shall consider the representation of the petitioner in
accordance with law and also as per the prevailing policy of the bank
and guidelines of RBI.
H)
The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four
weeks from the receipt of such representation. The bank shall
communicate its decision by R.P.A.D. Post to the petitioner.
I)
After the decision of the bank, if the petitioner is aggrieved, the
petitioner may resort to the remedy, as available in law for
challenging the said action of the bank for appropriation of the
amount or for receipt of the surplus amount recovered by the bank
from the sale of the property. At that stage the rights and
contentions of both the sides, shall remain open.
The
petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions. No
order as to costs. Direct service is permitted.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.)
Suresh*
Top