M/S Delcon Engineering Pvt. Ltd vs The South Indian Bank Ltd
2022 Latest Caselaw 9742 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 27672 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

    1       M/S DELCON ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.
            MULLA MANSION, PB NO. 47, SHAHPUR,
            NEAR MARUTI TEMPLE, PONDA,
            PANAJI, GOA.
            REPRESENTED BY ITS CEO MRS.KADEEJA AHMED, PIN - 403401
    2       KADEEJA AHMED
            AGED 56 YEARS
            W/O T.D. AHMED(LATE),
            MUNEEF MANZIL, CHATTANCHAL,
            CHENGALA P.O., KASARGOD
            , PIN - 671541
    3       T.D.MUNNER
            AGED 37 YEARS
            S/O T.D. AHMED(LATE),
            MUNEEF MANZIL, CHATTANCHAL,
            CHENGALA P.O., KASARGOD
            , PIN - 671541
            BY ADVS.
            J.G.SYAMNATH
            MUHAMMED SAFEER A.


RESPONDENT/S:

            THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
            SIB HOUSE, T.B. ROAD,
            MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR.
            REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER , PIN - 680001
            BY ADV SRI.K.K.JOHN,SC,SOUTH INDIAN BANK




            ADV. SUNIL SHANKAR (SC)


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 27672 OF 2022                 2



                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioners have approached this Court, being aggrieved by

the fact that the properties of the petitioners are being brought

to sale by the respondent bank on 30.08.2022. The proceedings

are initiated to recover a liability of nearly Rs.14.34 Crores.

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners that a substantial extent of property belonging

to the petitioners have been acquired by the National Highways

Authority for widening of NH-66 and a huge amount of

compensation is likely to be received by the petitioner. It is

submitted that the bank has already approached this Court,

seeking a direction to the National Highway Authorities to

release the amount of compensation directly in favour of the

bank. It is submitted that, according to the petitioners, a sum of

nearly Rs.8 Crores will be received as compensation.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank

submitted that as per instructions received by him, the amount

of compensation that is likely to be paid by the National Highway

Authorities will not exceed Rs.1.30 Crores. It is submitted that

since the liability is huge, the fact that the National Highway

Authorities may release an amount of compensation in respect of

the acquired property is no reason to hold back the proceedings.

It is also submitted that if this Court were to even consider the

passing of conditional order, the petitioners will not be in a

position to comply with that order. It is further pointed out that

even if this Court were to adjourn the present writ petition, the

same will drive away genuine buyers and that the bank will find

it difficult to hold the sale on 30.08.2022. It is pointed out that

this Court in OP(DRT) No.9 of 2021 has observed as follows:-

'' 27. In this context, this Court deems it apposite to observe that, in the absence of specific cases of violation of provisions of law, the Tribunals would do well not to interfere with auction sales, unless of course the secured creditor consent. It is vital to the scheme and intent of the Act that the sanctity of auction sales are maintained, lest the intending bidders would think twice before coming forward with bids. If the intending bidders are ensured the required confidence of auction sales under the Act, the price fetched at such auctions will be higher. Such higher prices at the auctions auger better in the interests of all and at the same time achieves the purpose of the Act also.''

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case and taking into consideration of the findings of this Court in

OP(DRT) No.9 of 2021, this writ petition is dismissed, making it

clear that it will always be open to the petitioners to seek

appropriate remedies from the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

sd/-

ajt                                             GOPINATH P., JUDGE




                      APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27672/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1              A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 13(2)
                        OF THE SARFAESI ACT, 2002 DATED 10-09-2021
Exhibit-P2              A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED
                        BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 10-12-2021
Exhibit-P3              A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE
                        BRANCH MANGER, CHERKALA BRANCH OF THE
                        RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit-P4              A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 22-07-

Exhibit-P5              A TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER CUM AUCTION SALE
                        NOTICE DATED 19-07-2022