Rajasthan High Court
Swastik Cooper Pvt Ltd vs Reserve Bank Of India on 18 October, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5949/2022
1. Swastik Cooper Pvt Ltd., Having Registered Office At
E1/1274, Phase Iii, Sitapura Industrial Area, Jaipur-
302022 (Rajasthan) Through Its Director Shri Sandeep
Jain
2. Shri Sandeep Jain S/o Late Shri Shashi Kumar Jain, R/o
Flat No.611, Mahima Fountain Square, Plot No.6, Jawahar
Circle, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur-302017
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Reserve Bank Of India, Rbi House, Takhteh Sahi Road,
Tonk Road, Jaipur
2. Axis Bank Ltd., O-15, Green House, Ashok Marg, C-
Scheme Jaipur 302001 And Also At Axis House, Tower T-
2, 2Nd Floor, 1-14, Sectior -128, Noida Expressway,
Jaypee Greens, Wishtown, Noida (Up) 201301 Through
Branch Manager
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Sharma, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Vikas Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Bhandari
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
18/10/2022
For the reasons stated in the application No.1/2022 for early
hearing the writ petition, the same is allowed. On the request of
the learned counsels for the respective parties, the writ petition is
heard on its merit today.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking a
direction to declare the RBI circular issued for moratorium during
the Covid-19 period as mandatory and to hold that their loan
(2 of 3) [CW-5949/2022]
account could not have been classified as Non Performing Asset
(for brevity, "the NPA") on 21.03.2020.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 raised a preliminary
objection as to maintainability of the writ petition inasmuch as it
has already filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity, "Code-2016") before the
National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for brevity,
"the NCLT") wherein, the petitioners have raised specific objection
against classification of their account as NPA on 21.03.2020.
Relying upon a Division Bench judgement of Hon'ble Calcutta High
Court dated 20.04.2022 in case of Birla Tyres Limited Vs.
Reserve Bank of India & Ors.: 2022 SCC Online Cal 833,
learned counsel would submit that this writ petition is not
maintainable as the issue is already subjudice before the NCLT.
He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would
submit that their account has erroneously been classified as NPA
with effect from 20.03.2022 in violation of the RBI Guidelines that
too in back date which requires consideration by this Court.
Heard. Considered.
Indisputably, the issue as to whether the petitioners' account
has erroneously been classified as NPA by the respondent No.2 is
subjudice before the NCLT under Section 7 of the Code-2016 as
the petitioners have raised an objection to this effect in their reply
to the petition filed by the respondent No.2 under Section 7 of the
Code-2016.. The Division Bench of Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta
has, in case of Birla Tyres Limited (supra), held as under:-
"7. Having heard the learned Counsel for the
parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed
(3 of 3) [CW-5949/2022]
that undisputedly, the respondent bank has initiated
the proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Learned Single Judge
has already held that the writ petition to be
maintainable for the purpose of moratorium
imposed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
thereafter has examined the issue and taken the
view that since the bank has already instituted
proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016 and the authorities thereunder are
better equipped to adjudicate the issue, therefore,
in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the matter of Small Scale Industrial
Manufactures Association (Registered) v. Union of
India reported in (2021) 8 SCC 511, has refused to
interfere by observing that the authorities under the
Code are competent to assess the correctness of the
decision of the bank to treat the account of the
appellant as NPA and to recall the advances.
Nothings has been pointed out to show that there is
any restriction upon the power of the authorities
under the Code to go into these issues. Hence, we
are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has
committed no error in dismissing the petition. We
have refrained ourselves from going into the merits
of the issue as the parties have the opportunity to
raise these issues before the authorities under the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and any
observation by this Court at this stage may
prejudice their right."
Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ
petition. Even otherwise also, contention of learned Senior
Counsel that their account has been declared NPA in back date
necessarily entails examination of disputed question of facts
which, this Court is not expected to enter into in its writ
jurisdiction.
Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed in view of
pendency of the issue involved in the writ petition before the NCLT.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
PRAGATI/s-299
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
