Babu Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40971 of 2023 Petitioner :- Babu Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Sonam Nishad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Habib Ahmad Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Habib Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the Bank.

¶2By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing possession notice dated 4.1.2023 issued under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(3) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "SARFAESI Act") by the respondent Bank.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a loan was taken by the petitioner. He had also mortgaged a property bearing Arazi No. 1/4, area 680 sq. ft., Mauza Shujabad, Pargana Ralhupur, Tehsil & District Varanasi, in the name of Shri Babu Ahamad son of Yakub Ahamad. 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 21.10.2022 under the SARFAESI Act and demanded a sum of Rs. 14,20,842/- alongwith interest and other charges. Learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the impugned order 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.

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that despite the fact that the one time settlement had failed, the petitioner was ready to deposit the entire amount in four equal instalments. At 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 four equal monthly installments.

¶5Learned counsel for the Bank Sri Habib Ahmad 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 four 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 :- 29.11.2023 PK (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad