Nasina Mallikarjuna v. The Union Bank Of India,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.39602 of 2015 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar): The prayer of the petitioner in this case is as under: "The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in issuing the auction notification dated 06.11.2015 as published in Eenadu Telugu daily on 07.11.2015 proposing to put the premises bearing D.No.16-3-85 old H.No.
2677 of Ramalingapuram, Nellore town and District wherein a Mess is run by the petitioner's Lessor, in flagrant disregard to the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, as being illegal, arbitrary and is in flagrant disregard to law apart from being in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the locks kept on the above premises viz., D.No.16-3-85, old H.No.2677 of Ramalingapuram, Nellore town & District forthwith, and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." By order dated 07.12.2015, this Court granted interim stay of further proceedings pursuant to the auction notification dated 06.11.
2015 on the condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- within four weeks from that date. Thereafter, by order dated 16.03.2016, this Court directed the respondents not to take any further steps pursuant to the auction notification dated 06.11.2015 subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of not less than Rs.5,00,000/- on or before 30.03.2016 and a further sum of Rs.7,50,000/- on or before 30.04.2016.
It is fairly stated by Sri Maruti Jadav, learned counsel representing Sri B.S. Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the Union Bank of India, the first respondent herein, that the afore-stated conditional orders have been duly complied with. Sri Jadav, learned counsel, would further state that as on date a sum of Rs.24,50,931/- is still outstanding and due towards the subject loan account.
Though a vacate stay petition has been filed by the Union Bank of India to vacate the order dated 07.12.2015, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view of the matter as the petitioner has dutifully complied with the conditional orders passed by this Court which reflects positively upon his bona fides in clearing the outstanding dues of the first respondent bank.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of permitting the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on or before the end of each calendar month commencing from June, 2016, till the outstanding dues of the first respondent bank are discharged in their entirety. The outstanding dues afore-stated shall not only include the principal amount and the interest due thereon but also the expenses incurred by the first respondent bank. In the event of default by the petitioner in making any of the monthly deposits as afore-stated, it shall be open to the first respondent bank to take suitable action in the matter in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs. __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J ___________________________ Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J Date:06.06.2016 GJ