M/S.Ponnaiyah Ramajayam v. Indian Bank,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.08.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.15479 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.12238 of 2017 M/s.Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science and Technology (PRIST)Trust, Represented by its, Managing Trustee Mr.P.Murugesan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.Indian Bank, Represented by its Assistant General Manager, Easwari Nagar Branch, Plot No.20/1 to 20/8, Natarajapuram South Colony, Thanjavur, Pin Code-613 007.
2.The Zonal Manager (DGM), Indian Bank, Zonal Office, Dr.Besant Road, Kumbakonam 612 001. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the Restructure proposal dated 15.11.2016 15.02.2017 and 18.02.2017 in respect of OD Account 6022808497 and Term Loan Accounts 6025860873, 6050166543 6093753214, 6093737021, 6242384088 & Bank Guarantee 6236204684 with first respondent submitted by the petitioner Trust. For Petitioner : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Senior Counsel for S.P.Sudalaiyandi For Respondents : Mr.P.V.Muralidar Standing Counsel
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.] The petitioner filed this Writ Petition to direct the respondents to pass orders on the proposal made for restructuring the loan, by considering the representations, dated 15.11.2016, 15.02.2017 and 18.01.2017.
2. The petitioner availed financial Assistance from the Indian Bank. Since the account was not satisfactory, the Bank treated it as Non Performing Asset (NPA). Thereafter, action was taken under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, (SARFAESI Act), for recovering the dues. In the meantime, the petitioner made a proposal for the purpose of restructuring the loan. The Bank by communication, dated 06.05.2017, called upon the petitioner to submit the Audited Financial Statements for the period ending 31.03.2015 and 31.03.2016 and other relevant papers on or before 12.05.2017. It is the grievance of the petitioner that notwithstanding the submission of all the required documents, follow up action was not taken by the Bank with regard to the proposal for restructuring the loan. The petitioner is, therefore, before this Court.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the Bank, on instructions, submitted that wayback on 08.03.2017, the Bank rejected the request of restructuring the loan. According to the learned counsel, subsequently taking into account the promise given by the petitioner that the account would be regularised, another opportunity was given to submit a comprehensive proposal with relevant documents.
4.The learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Bank would look into the proposal and orders would be passed on or before 04 September 2017.
5. In view of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the Bank that the proposal would be considered on merits, we direct the Bank to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible and in any case, on or before 04.09.2017.
6. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner should be given an opportunity of hearing before passing orders by the Bank. The learned Standing Counsel for the Bank agreed to give such an opportunity.
7. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. Consequently, connected W.M.P.(MD)No.12238 of 2017 is closed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Records) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar +1cc to Mr.P.V.MURALIDHAR,Advocate,SR.75508 +1cc to Mr.SUDALAIYANDI,Advocate,SR.75431 W.P(MD)No.15479 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.12238 of 2017 30.08.2017 PJL/VSG KK/SKN RSK/SAR 3/01.09.2017/ 3P- 3C