Ravi Chandra v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 34843 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ravi Chandra Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Satish Chaturvedi Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶1By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the impugned notice published on 26.7.2023 by the respondent no.2 under Section 13(4) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Annexure No.2) and has further prayed that respondents be directed to not to give effect to the notice dated

26.7.2023.

¶2Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a loan of Rs.3,00,000/- was taken by the petitioner on 13.8.2019 from State Bank of India, Branch Naraini, District Banda and he had also mortgaged a property owned by the borrower-petitioner. 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 Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act') by issuing notice dated 26.7.2023 under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act and demanded a sum of Rs.3,84,077/- alongwith interest and other charges. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the impugned notice dated 26.7.2023 and asserted that the Bank has taken symbolic possession of the mortgaged property and it makes clear that the Bank would be taking further steps to recover the dues by auctioning the mortgaged property.

¶3At the very outset, learned counsel for 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 be paid in next three equal monthly installments.

¶4Sri Brhmanand Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the Bank, does not dispute the fact that pursuant to the recovery proceedings including the impugned notice dated 26.7.2023, no auction proceedings have been fixed. She further does not oppose the prayer and stated that if the borrowers are willing to clear the debt in installments, the outstanding debt be directed to be paid with up-to-date interest.

¶5In 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 borrowers to clear the debt in installments i.e. by depositing 25% of the outstanding amount within a period of one month from today, and the remaining amount be paid in three equal monthly installments.

¶6Needless 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 alongwith the last installment.

¶7We clarify that, if, the amount as has been promised by the petitioner is not deposited as per the undertaking then the Bank shall free to recover the debt pursuant to the impugned notice dated 26.7.2023.

¶8With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 P.S.Parihar High Court of Judicature at Allahabad