AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider his representation dated 16.09.2016, wherein and whereby he
sought for conversion of his overdraft into a term loan.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the said representation has not been considered so far.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner''s representation may be treated as an application filed under
Section 3(a) of the SARFESI Act.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent bank filed a counter affidavit and stated that the petitioner has been given cash credit
facility to the tune of Rs.30,00,000/- and the petitioner could not repay the loan in time. It is further stated that the bank has initiated recovery
proceedings under SARFESI Act.
When there is a dispute between the petitioner and the bank in respect of the loan, which is culminated into a proceedings under SARFESI Act,
this Court, at this stage, cannot issue any direction to the bank either to consider the representation of the petitioner or to convert the Overdraft
into term loan, as it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum, by filing appropriate application. Needless to say that
parallel proceedings cannot be permitted to go on in respect of the very same cause of action, over which, SARFESI proceedings are already
initiated by the respondent bank. Therefore, I find that the prayer sought for in this writ petition cannot be entertained.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in a manner known to law under the
SARFESI Act before the appropriate forum. No costs.