Madras High CourtWP(MD)/24335/2016disposed of

A.Jaffer Sadhick v. The Zonal Officer

2017-01-30Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.01.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P(MD)No.24335 of 2016 A.Jaffer Sadhick .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Zonal Officer, Zonal Office, Indian Bank, Madurai.

2.The Chief Manager/Authorized Officer, Indian Bank, Kodaikkanal Branch, Kodaikkanal, Dindigul District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation, dated 16.09.2016. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chellapandian For Respondents : Mr.M.Senthilkumar

ORDER

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider his representation dated 16.09.2016, wherein and whereby he sought for conversion of his overdraft into a term loan.

2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the said representation has not been considered so far. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner's representation may be treated as an application filed under Section 3(a) of the SARFESI Act. 4.On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent bank filed a counter affidavit and stated that the petitioner has been given cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.30,00,000/- and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the petitioner could not repay the loan in time. It is further stated that the bank has initiated recovery proceedings under SARFESI Act.

5.When there is a dispute between the petitioner and the bank in respect of the loan, which is culminated into a proceedings under SARFESI Act, this Court, at this stage, cannot issue any direction to the bank either to consider the representation of the petitioner or to convert the Overdraft into term loan, as it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum, by filing appropriate application. Needless to say that parallel proceedings cannot be permitted to go on in respect of the very same cause of action, over which, SARFESI proceedings are already initiated by the respondent bank. Therefore, I find that the prayer sought for in this writ petition cannot be entertained. 6.

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in a manner known to law under the SARFESI Act before the appropriate forum. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS I) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar +1cc to Mr.S.Chellapandian, Advocate SR.No.5123 skn sm:BS:07/02/2017:2P/2C W.P(MD)No.24335 of 2016 30.01.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.