AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dinesh Kumar Singh, J
Heard Mr V Premchand, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr Renjith R, learned Counsel for R1 to R3, and Mr Mohan Jacob George, learned Counsel for R4.
The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking inter alia the following reliefs:
“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 1st respondent Bank to keep in abeyance all coercive actions pursuant to Exhibit P2 Notice against the 1st petitioner till a decision is taken pursuant to Exhibit P5 to take over and clear the liability of the 1st petitioner.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 1st respondent to pass immediate orders on the scheme submitted by the 4th respondent Bank to take over the liability of the 1st petitioner and to keep all coercive steps against the 1st petitioner in abeyance.
iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to pass immediate orders in Exhibit P6.
iv. The petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language.
v. Any other relief this Hon’ble Court deems fit.”
The 1st petitioner availed a loan facility from the 1st respondent Bank pledging a property having an extent of 3.85 Ares in Survey No.184 of Edakochi Village. It appears that the petitioner has been unable to discharge his liability towards the Bank. As on 24.03.2022, the outstanding amount in respect of the loan was Rs.1,54,92,422.46. The Bank issued notices to the petitioner for discharge of the outstanding liabilities. However, the petitioner failed to discharge the liability, and therefore the Bank, having no option but to resort to the SARFAESI proceedings, filed an application before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam in M.C. No.1113/2022, under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 03.03.2023 appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured asset.
The 1st and the 2nd petitioners have made arrangements, whereby the 2nd petitioner, through M/s Sky Bond Glazing - a partnership firm of which the 2nd petitioner is one of the partners, has agreed to purchase the secured asset. The 4th respondent Bank has sanctioned a loan of Rs.1.50 crores to M/s Sky Bond Glazing for the purchase of the secured asset. A copy of the said communication has been tendered in the Court, which is being taken on record and marked as ‘Paper X’.
The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to discharge the liability of the 1st respondent Bank. Besides the Rs.1.50 crores which has been sanctioned by the Federal Bank, any other outstanding amount will be discharged by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today.
The learned Counsel for the 1st respondent, though, has objected to the maintainability of the writ petition, does not have much objection regarding the payment of outstanding dues by the petitioners and if the liability is discharged within a period of three weeks from today, the 1st respondent Bank shall release the papers and discharge the mortgage.
The learned Counsel for the 4th respondent/Federal Bank also does not dispute the fact that the Federal Bank has agreed to sanction a loan of Rs.1.50 crores for the purchase of the said secured asset by the 2nd petitioner through M/s Sky Bond Glazing.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of as under:
(i) The petitioners shall discharge all the liabilities of the 1st respondent Bank within a period of three weeks from today.
(ii) The Federal Bank shall honour its commitment to release Rs.1.50 crores as loan amount for the purchase of the secured asset by the 2nd petitioner through M/s Sky Bond Glazing, subject to the fulfilment of the conditions of the Federal Bank for sanctioning the said loan amount.
(iii) On discharge of liability by the petitioners, the 1st respondent Bank shall release the papers and mortgage of the secured asset to the petitioners.
(iv) In case the petitioners fail to discharge the liability as mentioned above, the 1st respondent Bank shall be free to proceed with the SARFAESI proceedings in accordance with law.