WPMS/2675/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 5141 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                    AT NAINITAL
      ON THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
                          BEFORE:
     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ K. TIWARI

     Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2675 of 2021
BETWEEN:

M/s Shyam Seeds, Grain Markwet Gadarpur
& others                        ... Petitioners
      (By Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate)

AND:

The Nainital Bank Ltd. & another           ... Respondents

      (By Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, learned counsel for the Bank
      and Mr. M.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State of
      Uttarakhand)


                       JUDGMENT

1. Petitioner No. 1 took a loan from Nainital Bank, Branch Grover Market, Guru Nanak Market, Udham Singh Nagar and petitioner nos. 2 & 3 are partners of the firm. Since the loan was not repaid in time, therefore, recovery proceedings were initiated by invoking provision of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short "SARFAESI Act") against the petitioners and possession notice was issued by District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act.

2. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that there were two immovable properties, which were mortgaged by the respondent bank, as collateral Security and on the request of the petitioners,

bank was kind enough to release the title deed in respect of one of the properties on deposit of `83 lakh and the bank's lien on the said property was also removed.

3. Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that another property, which is still mortgaged with the bank, is big chunk of land in the midst of Gadarpur town and surrounded by residential colonies, and in case, bank permit the petitioners to bring prospective purchasers, who may pay adequate price for the plots to be carved out of the said land, then the amount of loan would be repaid. He further submits that in this regard, petitioners have already made representation to the respondent bank, which is still pending.

4. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought following reliefs:-

(i) Issue a writ, order in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.11.2021 passed by respondent no. 2 (contained as Annexure No. 12 to the writ petition)

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to release the mortgaged property "A" (residential house) as a release money has already been deposited before the bank.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to act in accordance with the proposal dated 28.10.2021 as petitioners have agreed to the same (contained as Annexure 8 to the writ petition).

5. Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, learned counsel for the Bank fairly submits that petitioners' request is under consideration before the Competent Authority in the

Bank. He assures the Court that decision on petitioners' request would be taken within two weeks from today.

6. Having regard to the statement so made by Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, learned counsel for the bank, the writ petition is disposed of by taking the statement on record.

7. Let certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties within 24 hours

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) Aswal