NAROTTAM SOMANI, CHIEF MANAGING DIRECTOR & GUARANTOR, M/S. MIDEX GLOBAL PVT. LTD AND OTHERS Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 11/6/2013 Annexure P/2 passed by the Additional Magistrate, Indore under section 14 of the Securitisation Act as also the notice dated 18/9/2017 Annexure P/1 directing the petitioners to remain present on the specified date for delivery of possession of the secured assets to the bank as also seeking a direction to the bank for redemption of the properties No.1,2, 4 and 5 mentioned in Para J-15 of the petition.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that the petitioner No.3 which is a registered private limited company, in course of its business had taken financial assistance from the respondent No.1 bank and the petitioner No.1 and 2 had stood as guarantor. On 19/1/2006 the bank had sanctioned various credit facilities of 23.25 crores to the petitioner No.3 in respect of which security interest was created. On 19/9/2007 modification in the existing credit facilities was sanctioned by the bank. On 9/10/2007, mortgage credit facilities of 16 crore was created along with credit exposure limit of 4.40 crores and thereafter on 10/4/2008 ISDA (International Swap and Derivative Agreement) was executed and on 12/1/2009 the petitioner No.3 sought working capital loan of 18 crores to make the crash credit limit account regular and thereafter on 9/2/2009 respondent No.1 had sanctioned enhanced credit facilities of 27.39 crores and on 14/5/2009 the security documents were executed for all the credit facilities aggregating to Rs. 30.55 crores. Subsequently the account of the petitioner No.3 was declared NPA, therefore, OA No.149/2011 was filed by the respondent bank before the DRT under the Recovery of Debts Due to Financial Institutions Act, 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 41,42,47,514/-. In the mean while on 21/5/2011 the notice under section 13(2) of the Securitisation Act was issued to the petitioners raising a demand of Rs. 40,52,30,116/-. The objections filed by the petitioner No.3 under section 13(3)(A) was rejected and the measures under section 13(4) read with Rule 8(1) and (2) (possession notice) was initiated. The 3 petitioner had filed SA No.199/2011 under section 17 of the Act and pending the said appeal, auction notice dated 28/2/2012 was issued. The prayer for stay was rejected by the DRT vide order dated 27/2/2012 and the auction was conducted by the bank on 28/2/2012. In respect of the property No.3 in Para J-15 of the petition being House No.14/2, Block No.658 and 15/2 Block No.657, New Palasia Road one K.K. Goyal was the successful bidder and the other four properties namely properties at Sl. No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 in Para J-15 were auctioned for Rs. 9.56 crores (approximately). The details of the properties as given in Para J-15 are as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_315_LAWS(MPH)12_2017_1.html</FRM>

(3.) The petitioner had filed appeal before the DRAT in which initially the DRAT had passed the order dated 28/2/2012 that the tenders may be opened, but the auction may be finalised without the leave of the appellate tribunal, but on 27/9/2012 the DRAT had directed the DRT to consider the preliminary objection of the petitioner regarding applicability of the SARFAESI Act. The WP No.17203/2012 and 17372/2012 filed against the order of DRAT by the bank and successful bidder were dismissed by the Principal seat by order dated 11/10/2012. The DRT vide order dated 9/4/2013 had rejected the preliminary objection of the bank, but the said order of the DRT was set aside by DRAT vide order dated 30th July, 2013 while allowing the appeal of the petitioner holding that the provisions of SARFAESI Act do apply. Meanwhile on 11/6/2013 the Additional District Magistrate had passed the impugned order under section 14 of the Securitisation Act. WP No.11720/2013 was filed by the bank and WP No.9918/2013 was filed by the successful bidder against the order of the DRAT dated 30th July, 2013 and pending the said writ petitions on 25/10/2014 OTS was arrived at between the borrower and the bank for a sum of Rs. 15 crores, therefore, on 5/1/2015 the respondent No.1 bank had filed an application before the ADM, Indore for withdrawing and closing the proceedings under section 14 of the Act. On 27/1/2015 the WP No.9918/2013 and 11720/2013 were allowed by the division bench and the order of the DRAT dated 30th July, 2013 was set aside. Against this order of the division bench, the bank as well as the other affected parties had preferred SLP(C) No.9478-9479/2015 and SLP(C)9828-9829/2015 and the supreme court by order dated 22/8/2017 had dismissed the SLP with certain directions. Thereafter the impugned notice dated 18/9/2017 was issued by Tehsildar for taking the possession of the secured assets, hence the present writ petition has been filed.