The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“i. To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate order to call for records relating to Ext-P1 to P3 proceedings and quash the same.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to defer the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 to P3 for period of 6 months.
iii. Direct the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 & P5 representation on merits.
and
iv. issue such other writ, order or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to be granted in the circumstances of the case.”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is running a Coir Industry and quite unfortunately, because of the adverse market conditions, the business fell in doldrums. This made the respondent Bank, who had extended financial assistance to proceed against the petitioner by invoking the remedy under the SARFAESI Act. It is stated that, the petitioner made some proposals before the respondent Bank to liquidate the liability in a phased manner. But the same has not been acted upon and hence the writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits during the course of hearing that, the net worth of the petitioner as borne by Ext.P6 certificate issued by a qualified Chartered Accountant is nearly Rs.26 Crores, whereas the total liability sought to be cleared by the petitioner is something more than Two Crores. It is also stated that, the petitioner has offered as many as 21 items of properties and the present request is only to cause 'private sale' of 'four' different items of properties coming to a total of 51.57 Ares, asserting and assuring that the petitioner is ready to make an immediate payment of Rupees One Crore and that the entire balance will be cleared within 'three months', by virtue of the private sale sought to be given effect to.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that the Bank has reasonable doubts on the bonafides of the petitioner, in so far as the petitioner had submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 17.10.2014, agreeing to deposit a sum of Rs.65 lakhs (25+40), so as to cause release of the title deeds of some of the items of the properties mentioned therein. No payment was effected and thereafter the petitioner came up with Ext.P5 representation dated 28.10.2014, the penultimate paragraph of which reads as follows:
“The total extent of the properties mortgaged to the bank for the loans availed by us is 2 hectares 55.95 Ares. The total outstanding of the two loans is Rs.2,10,02,076/-. We are requesting a letter agreeing to release only 51.57 Ares of land on payment of Rs.1 Crore. If this letter is given by the bank we shall be able to repay the balance amount also within 3 months of paying Rs.1 Crore. The security now mortgaged with bank is worth more than 15 crores.”
The petitioner rushed to this Court on the very next day, stating that Ext.P5 preferred by the petitioner has not been acted upon by the respondents.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the present proposal as per Ext.P5 is to ensure that the entire liability payable to the Bank is cleared once and for all, adding that prospective purchasers have already been identified and they are ready to part with money, subject to acceptance of the proposal in Ext.P5.
6. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that, if the petitioner is having a genuine interest to liquidate the liability honouring the commitment as given in Ext.P5, the Bank is ready to have such a course, subject to satisfaction of Rupees One Crore immediately.
7. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to effect an immediate deposit of Rupees One Crore, which shall be effected within 'ten days', upon which, a letter shall be issued by the Bank so as to give effect to the proposal in Ext.P5. The sale consideration payable to the petitioner by the prospective purchaser shall be routed only through the Bank and it will be for the Bank to appropriate the requisite extent, so as to liquidate the entire liability under the loan transaction and the balance amount shall be released to the petitioner, unless the petitioner agrees to have the same deposited in the Bank or dealt with otherwise. This shall be done at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp