GAURAV KUMAR TRIPATHI Vs. BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner was granted a term loan of Rs. 5,60,000/ -by the Respondent Bank. According to the Petitioner, due to unforeseen circumstances and reasons beyond his control, he could not repay the amount due in time. According to him, prior to default he had regularly deposited the amount with the Bank. Now the Bank is proceeding against the Petitioner under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the realisation of loan amount etc.

(2.) WE have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri Manish Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the Respondent -Bank and have perused the averments made in the writ petition.

(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent -Bank submitted that although the petition is not maintainable since sufficient opportunity has already been given to the borrower for clearing up the outstanding dues but the Bank has no objection if some indulgence is given by this Court regarding payment of dues in installments as the bank is interested in realisation of its dues.