AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.S. Bopanna, C.J
Heard Mr. B.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners are before this Court seeking issue of a direction to the respondents not to take possession of the mortgaged property and also to dispose of the representation/ proposal submitted by the petitioners on 6.8.2018 for settlement of the outstanding loan amount and to provide a reasonable opportunity to settle the loan amount.
The fact that the petitioners are borrowers from the Respondent Bank and the amount is outstanding is not in dispute inasmuch as the petitioners themselves are seeking consideration of their representation for settlement of the amount. In that regard, the petitioners had made a representation, which at the earlier instance, was considered by the Bank and it was intimated vide the communication dated 15.6.2018 that the proposal as made was not acceptable and a revised proposal be submitted. The petitioners claim that a revised proposal dated 6.8.2018 has been submitted, but no action has been taken by the respondents. It is in that view, the petitioners seek that an appropriate direction be issued to consider the representation and further direct the respondents not to take further action till the representation is considered.
In the above stated facts, when it is noticed that towards the outstanding amount, the Respondent Bank has initiated the proceedings seeking for recovery certificate under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 in O.A. No. 216/2016, even if the petitioners had the intention to settle the amount, appropriate proposal can be made in the said proceeding. That apart, though the petitioners seek that a direction be issued to the respondents not to take possession of the mortgaged property, no material particulars are available with regard to the present status of the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act'). In that view, it would not be appropriate for this Court to entertain a petition of the present nature. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to avail the remedy in accordance with law and even if the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act is initiated, the petitioners are not left without any remedy.
In that view, the petition is disposed of.