GEO KURIAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the Bank.

(2.) FIRST petitioner is a dealer in rubber. On 13.02.2009, the Bank granted him an overdraft facility of Rs.75 lakhs. As security for the facility, petitioners 2 and 3 along with three others stood as guarantors. Further, three items of immovable properties were also mortgaged by depositing title deeds. The account was irregular and was classified as NPA on 14/05/2011. Notices were issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and replies were also filed. According to the Bank, they decided to simultaneously proceed under the Revenue Recovery Act. Accordingly, Ext.R3(d) requisition under Section 69(2) of the Revenue Recovery Act was issued by the Bank, it being an institution notified under Section 71 of the said Act and as according to the Bank, the overdraft facility enjoyed by the first petitioner came within the purview of priority sector advances. On the basis of the requisition thus issued, Exts.P6 and P7 notices were issued under Sections 7 and 34 of the Revenue Recovery Act. It was thereupon, this writ petition was filed challenging the recovery proceedings.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Bank and according to the Bank, in view of the provisions contained in Exts.R3 (k), (l), (m) and (n) circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India and the Bank itself, the overdraft facility granted to the 1st petitioner was for a "small business" and therefore, is a priority sector advance, recoverable under the Revenue Recovery Act in terms of Ext.R3(j) notification.