Sri Mathamsetti Naga Veera ... vs Bank Of Baroda
2021 Latest Caselaw 5505 AP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5505 AP
Judgement Date : 27 December, 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Sri Mathamsetti Naga Veera ... vs Bank Of Baroda on 27 December, 2021

    HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI


      HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
                          AND
         HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE B. S. BHANUMATHI


                WRIT PETITION No.29661 OF 2021

1. Sri Mathamsetti Naga Veera Venkata Satyanarayana,
   S/o. Late Ramalingeswara rao, aged 50 years,
   Occ: Proprietor M/s. Sri Ayyappa Traders,
   R/o. Door No. 10-4-4, Ranguresupeta,
   Near Kotagummam, Rajahmundry,
   Andhra Pradesh - 531077.
2. Smt. Mathamsetti Madhavi, W/o Mathamsetti
   Naga Veera Venkata Satyanarayana, aged 42 years,
   Occ: House wife, R/o. Door No.10-4-4,
   Ranguresupeta, Near Kotagummam, Rajahmundry,
   Andhra Pradesh - 531077
3. Smt. Mathamsetti Lakshmi, W/o late Ramalingeswararao,
   Aged 80 years, Occ: Proprietrix M/s Lakshmi Cashew
   Processing Unit, R/o. Door No.10-4-4/1, Ranguresupeta,
   Near Kotagummam, Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh-531077
                                                       ...     Petitioners
             Versus

Bank of Baroda, Rajamahendravaram Branch,
represented by its Authorized Officer and Chief Manager,
Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh.
                                                ...    Respondent

Counsel for the petitioners : Mr. K. B. Ramanna Dora, Advocate

Counsel for the respondent : Mr. Satyanarayana Dhara, Advocate

ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27.12.2021

(Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah)

Heard Mr. P. Vivek, learned counsel, representing

Mr. K. B. Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Satyanarayana Dhara, learned counsel for the respondent-

Bank of Baroda.

2. The petitioners have moved the Court against the

e-auction notice, dated 08.12.2021 with regard to their property,

which was the secured asset for the loan taken by the petitioner

no.1.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

against such action by the respondent-Bank, the petitioners had

moved the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Tribunal'), in Securitization Application No.253

of 2020 in which, by order, dated 11.01.2021, the Tribunal had

directed the petitioners to pay 5% of the notice amount before

20.01.2021 and another 15% of the notice amount within one

month thereafter and stay was granted. However, it was

submitted that the petitioners had paid 5% before 20.01.2021,

but did not pay the 15%, for which explanation was sought and

ultimately the petitioners were required to pay the remaining 15%

by 15.03.2021.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted

that the petitioners, due to COVID pandemic situation, could not

do so, but shall be repaying the entire outstanding amount within

three months. It was further contended that five properties of the

petitioners asked to be sold for meager amount, whereas the

entire dues of less than 2 Crores can be satisfied by selling just

one property.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank, who has filed

counter affidavit, submitted that the conduct of the petitioners is

not fair, since even after being granted stay by paying only meager 15% amount, for which sufficient time was granted, they

have defaulted and till date they have not complied with the

same. Thus, it was submitted that the petitioners, by conduct,

have disentitled themselves for any indulgence by this Court.

6. On a specific query to learned counsel for the

respondent as to whether they would be agreeable to grant three

months time for repayment of the entire amount due by the

petitioners, learned counsel submitted that the Court may direct

them to pay in installments and not give three months time at

one go.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners agreed to the said

condition.

8. Accordingly, with consent, the writ petition stands

disposed of in the following terms.

(i) The respondent-bank shall communicate to the petitioners within one week from today the outstanding up-to-date dues as on 31.12.2021.

(ii) The petitioners, thereafter, shall pay 30% of the amount by 31.01.2022.

(iii) Another 30% shall be paid by 28.02.2022.

(iv) Upon doing so, the respondent-bank shall calculate the remaining outstanding amount till 31.03.2022 and the same shall be cleared by the petitioners by 31.03.2022.

9. Upon the same being done, the bank shall not proceed in

the matter with regard to taking any steps for recovery of the

amount under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial

Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

10. In the meantime, the respondent-bank shall proceed

with the e-auction scheduled for 29.12.2021, but there shall be

no confirmation of sale and in the event, the petitioners default in

making the payment as per the schedule indicated above, it shall

be open to the bank to proceed with further steps pursuant to the

said e-auction.

11. As the order has been passed on the stand taken by the

learned counsel for the petitioners, any violation of the same