M/S Disha Enterprise And Another v. Punjab National Bank

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 12513 of 2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.09.2021 M/s. Disha Enterprise and another .......... Petitioners

Versus

Punjab National Bank, Karnal .......... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:

Mr. Sumit S. Bairagi, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Nitin Grover, Advocate for Mr. Omkar Gupta, Advocate for the respondent - Bank.

[ The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court ] **** JASWANT SINGH, J. (ORAL Petitioner No. 1 (M/s. Disha Enterprise) is a proprietorship concern and petitioner No. 2 (Mem Pal S/o Mange Ram) is the proprietor of petitioner No. 1. The petitioners had availed the three (03) loan facilities for the business purpose, the details of which are as under:- Sr.

No.

Loan Account No.

Amount of Loan (` in Lakhs) 6514011000224 (Cash Credit) 6517016000911 (Term Loan) 6517016000928 (Term Loan) 10.50 Due to lack of financial discipline, the aforesaid loan accounts were declared as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 29.08.2020. A Demand Notice dated 06.04.2021 (Annexure P-1) under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of DINESH KUMAR 2021.09.08 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short "the SARFAESI Act, 2002") was

C.W.P. No. 12513 of 2021 (O&M) -2issued to the petitioners, claiming an amount of ` 21,72,252.22. The said notice dated 06.04.2021 (P-1) has been impugned in the present petition. On the previous date of hearing, i.e. 02.09.2021, the following order was passed:- "

Proxy counsel for the respondent - Bank prays for time to file a short affidavit of the Authorised Officer of the respondent - Bank, detailing the factual position with respect to compliance of the provisions of Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, as also the eligibility of the petitioners under any subsisting One Time Settlement (OTS) Policy.

List on 07.09.2021. "

At the time of resumed hearing today, counsel for the respondent - Bank, on instructions, states that the total outstanding amount comes to ` 22,89,084/- as on 30.06.2021 and the Bank has not proceeded to take possession of the mortgaged property as yet, however, the petitioners are entitled to avail the benefit of Special OTS Policy-2021, in case they invoke it in terms of the policy.

In view of the above, it is apparent that no cause of action is accrued as on date, the present petition is hereby dismissed. The petitioners are free to seek / take the benefit under the Special OTS Policy 2021.

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE September 07, 2021 ( VIKAS BAHL ) 'dk kamra'

JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2021.09.08 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document