Piyush Gupta v. Bank of Baroda Branch

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36814 of 2023 Petitioner :- Piyush Gupta Respondent :- Bank Of Baroda Branch Counsel for Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- Anadi Krishna Narayana Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶1Heard Sri Ved Prakash Pandey learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Namit Srivastava holding brief of Sri Anadi Krishna Narayana, learned counsel appearing for the Bank.

¶2By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing possession notice dated 13.10.2023 issued under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as SARFAESI Act) by the respondent.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a loan was taken by the petitioner. He had also mortgaged a property situate at Gata No. 262 village Harharpur, Pargana & Tehsil - Tilhar, District - Shahjahanpur, measuring 0.3806 sqmt. which was in the names of Sri Manoj Kumar & Mr. Piyush Gupta son of Mr. Subhash Chandra Gupta. Learned counsel has further pointed out that when certain payments of the loan installments were not made, the creditor Bank initiated proceedings of recovery under the SARFAESI Act by issuing notice dated

14.7.2023 under the SARFAESI Act and demanded a sum of Rs. 73,46,920.70/- alongwith interest and other charges. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the impugned notice dated 13.10.2023 and asserted that the Bank has taken symbolic possession of the mortgaged property and would be strongly taking further steps to recover the dues by auctioning the mortgaged property.

¶4At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioner has proposed to deposit 25% of the outstanding amount within a period of one month from today, with an undertaking that the remaining amount shall be paid in next three equal monthly installments.

¶5Learned counsel for the Bank does not dispute the fact that pursuant to the recovery proceedings including the impugned notice dated 13.10.2023, no auction proceedings have been fixed. He, however, states that the Bank has no objection if the borrower is willing to clear the debt by paying 25% of the outstanding amount within a period of one month from today and remaining amount in next three equal monthly installments.

¶6In view of the above stand of the learned counsel for the parties, at this stage, without looking into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to afford an opportunity to the borrower to clear the debt by paying 25% of the outstanding amount within a period of one month from today, and the remaining amount in next three equal monthly installments. The outstanding debt be directed to be paid with up-to-date interest.

¶7Needless to say that when the last installment is paid by the petitioner, the bank shall inform the petitioner the interest amount which would have accrued by the last date of payment and it shall be paid along with the last installment.

¶8We clarify that, if, the amount as has been promised by the petitioner is not deposited as per the undertaking then the Bank shall be free to recover the debt pursuant to the impugned notice.

¶9With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 27.10.2023 PK (Manoj Bajaj,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad