हिंदी समाचार पढ़े
Expand
O.P. Jindal Global University
 
Home / Latest News /  HC denies claims of 30% Penal interest against Businessmen

 HC denies claims of 30% Penal interest against Businessmen

January 12, 2019:

Bombay High Court division bench consisting of Justice K.K.Tated and Justice N.J.Jamadar has dismissed the two writ petitions filed by Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai against the Sunil Solvent. Extraction Pvt. Ltd.,  a partnership firm – Ms Suresh Trading Co and its partners.- of Katangikala in Gondia District, holding that the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Nagpur, exercised the discretion to award interest in the orders passed on February 11, 2014, and March 27,2014 at the rate of  8 pc per annum, correctly and not arbitrarily and affirmed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai on October 19, 2016, in two appeals.

Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court
The DRT had directed the defendant to pay Rs 4.37 crores to the petitioner towards full and final settlement of the dues with 6 pc per annum interest in the event of default in making payment.,against the claim of the petitioner of Rs 4.50,65,000/- with 13.60 pc per annum interest. On the petitioner seeking review, the DRT enhanced the rate of interest to 8 pc. Dissatisfied still with the rate of interest, the petitioner moved the DRAT in appeal. DRAT maintained the DRT’s orders as it is. This led to the filing of the writ petitions before the HC with the claim of  30 pc interest.
The HC has also held in the totality of the facts and circumstances that the award of interest at the rate of 8 pc is just and proper. Thus, the challenge on this count failed.
 According to the HC the pivotal question which cropped up before it, whether the notice of March 31, 2011, issued and subsequently published by the petitioner satisfies the statutory requirement under section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act and Rule 8 of the rules, 2002. The object of the said notice appears to proclaim that three petitioner stood to have surrogated in the place of Bank of India
The said notice nowhere indicates that it was addressed tothe borrower.It does not satisfy the requirement of Rule 8nor it appears to be in substantial compliance with the form prescribed in Appendix IV  appended to Rules, 2002. Therefore,the HC held that  the DRT was within its rights to record the finding that the said notice of March 31, 2011, cannot be considered as a notice under section13(4) of the SARFAESI  Act.
The HC also noted that the DRT did not negative the claim of the petitioner only on the premise that there was a delay of 4 days in publishing the notice of March 31, 2011. In fact, the substantive reason was that the said notice did not acquit itself as a statutory notice, as contemplated in section 13(4) of the 2002 Act. The HC has pointed out that the Supreme Court has held in its decision of the case- Mathew Verghese v. M.Amritha Kumar & Others – (2014) 5 SCC 610 that unless and until a clear 30 days’ notice is given to the borrower, no sale or transfer can be resorted to by secured creditor.
In the backdrop of this position of law, the HC has held that though the secured creditor has been statutorily empowered to enforce the security interest without intervention of the court or the Tribunal, yet the statutory provisions prescribing the manner in which the security interest is to be enforced are to be scrupulously observed. The section13(4) of the Act read with the sub-Rule (1) t0 (4) and (6) of Rule 8 and sub-Rule (1) of Rule 9 make it explicitly clear that after the secured asset turns into a non-performing asset (NPA), it cannot be dealt with a high-handed manner and disposed of casually without adhering to the procedure prescribed by the Act and Rules of 2002.
Due to these reasons, the HC has to hold that in the facts and circumstances of the case, that there is total non-compliance of Rule 8(2) of the Rules of 2002. Hence, the publication of the notice ofMartch 31, 2011 does not help the cause of the petitioner.
The HC has also pointed out that itis abundantly clear that there was no specific stipulation regarding the rate of interest payable in the event of default. Clause 9 of the letter of acceptance of April 6, 2011, providing for penal interest at 30 pc per annum, was, however, not a part of the consent terms executed before the DRT, on the basis of which The DRT Passed the order on July 25, 2011.
The fact that the contract rate of interest agreed to be paid in the event of default in the terms of the settlement is not borne out from the record. The rate of interest was determined by the DRT in view of the consent given by the parties.
In this backdrop, the petitioner was precluded by the HC from challenging the grant of interest at the rate of 8 pc per annum based on the consent and concession made by the petitioner as well. The statement of fact recorded in the judgment as to what transpired at the hearing, are conclusive of the facts so stated and no one can contradict such statements by affidavit or other evidence. Hence the issue of the fixing of the rate of interest cannot be reopened now. Moreover, the grant of a future interest under section 34 of the CPC is discretionary in nature.AdvocatesCharles De Souza appeared for the petitioners. Advocate Atul Pande represented the respondents.
Facebook Comments

 
Related tags :
 
Four Pillars of Democracy Four Pillars of Democracy             by Satish Painting India Saffron Painting India Saffron TOI TOI Demonitisation Diaries 1 Demonitisation Diaries 1                                  pic by sify   UIDAI Leaks UIDAI Leaks State of Affairs Women Safety: State of Affairs             pic by mangal [caption id="attachment_97467" align="alignleft" width="621"]Humour with Latest Laws Humour with Latest Laws[/caption] Soaring of Oil Prices pic by indiaone Hindu Hindu NPA Hurts Public Sector Banks NPA Hurts Public Sector Banks Alligator vs Litigator Alligator vs Litigator Netas in Election mode Netas in Election mode Delivery Boy Delivery Boy                    by Satish Hindu

IBN IBN

Hindu

Hindu

Hindu Hindu

pinterest

Missing the Point Missing the Point pic by english blog

Hindu

State of JudiciaryState of Judiciary by Sandeep Adhwaryu of TOI

TOI

TOI

TOI Humour @ Latest Laws Achhey Din Humour @ Latest Laws: Achhey Din America First Walk Your own Talk Demonitisation Diaries Demonitisation Diaries                                                       by sify

TOI

Cartoon

Hindu Hindu

TOI

TOI

TOI Hindu Hindu Hindu

TOI

Lawyers Bearing the Burden Literally Lawyers Bearing the Burden Literally pic by OMG Auto Driver thrashed for no fault Auto Driver thrashed for no fault,                  source oneindia

Hindu

Hindu

Hindu

If India takes One Step, we will take Two by Satish If India takes One Step, we will take Two ...................by Satish

TOI

Hindu Acheche DIn Acheche Din     pic by sify Hindu Time to straighten up Time to straighten up                pic by TOI Pic by Hindu Women Empowerment and Sports Women Empowerment and Sports TOI

...as an eminent lawyer you ought to know that your action tantamount to, under Section B, sub-section G.VIX, read along with I.P.C. (A) XI (B), notwithstanding...                                        TOI

TOI

150425_-_farmers_a_2384764f

Hindu

ALL_1_Theme_01A_24_2383617g

Hindu

Tax Reforms    by Hindu Tax Reforms by Hindu

Hindu

Let Justice Be Let Justice Be Job Hazards

TOI

Belts are for Dogs Belts are for Dogs Pakistan Democracy Pakistan Democracy Donald Trump’s immigration ban Donald Trump’s immigration ban

TOI

Hindu Hindu

Hindu

State of Two Nations State of Two Nations               pic by sandeep Demonitisation Diaries 2 Demonitisation Diaries 2  pic by sify
Download our App
ios icon
android icon
 
 
 

Check Also

Doctors 'leave' scissors in woman's stomach during surgery, case booked

High Court asks State if order mandating Videographing Post Mortem was complied with

March 20, 2019 The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court asked the State if its order specifying that post mortem must be videographed & kept as a copy for record was complied with. On Tuesday, a Division Bench of ...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *