M/S Vishwakarama Furnitures Udyog Ltd v. The State Bank Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20896 of 2012 =========================================================== M/S Vishwakarama Furniture's Udyog Ltd. Through It's Proprietor Bachan Deo Sharma Son of Late Triveni Sharma Resident of Village + P.O. Bari Aghu, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Begusarai .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Bank of India through Regional Manager (Region-III) Regional Business Office, Near Harhar Mahadeo Chowk, Begusarai

2. The Regional Manager (Region-III) Regional Business Office, Near Harhar Mahadeo Chowk, Begusarai

3. The Authorised Officer, State Bank Of India (Main Branch), Nagar Palika Market, Begusarai

4. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, New Delhi

5. Sri Madhavjee S/O Not Known to the Petitioner through the Authorised Officer State Bank Of India (Main Branch), Nagar Palika Market, Begusarai .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar,Advocate For Resp. No. 4 : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Advocte For the SBI : Mr. Anshuman Singh, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, Advocate. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent bank.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent Bank to accept the amount from the petitioner as per the compromise before the Lok Adalat; and for connected reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the proceedings before the Lok Adalat, a compromise was reached and the loan account of the petitioner was settled at Rs. 5,60,000/-. The said amount however, could not be paid in its entirety and the respondent bank took

Patna High Court CWJC No.20896 of 2012 dt.04-07-2016 recourse to auction under The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets And Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "the SARFAESI Act") for recovery of its dues. In due course, notices under Section 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act were issued and the mortgaged property has since been sold.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent bank states that the sale certificate dated 10.10.2012 has been issued in favour of the auction purchaser (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit of Respondent No. 5).

5. In the facts of the circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The petitioner shall be at liberty to seek recourse to any appropriate remedy as may be available to it in accordance with law for redressal of its grievances. It is made clear that the present judgment shall not prejudice any such course of action that the petitioner may avail.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE - Uploading Date 11.07.2016 Transmission Date -