ANU STONE CRUSHER Vs. BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed in Writ Petition No. 5768/2008 (M/s, Anu Stone crusher v. Bank of India and others) will also govern the disposal of Wrti Petition No. 5770/2008 (M/s. Bajaj Stone Crusher v. Bank of India and others) and Writ Petition no. 5781/2008 (M/s. Saroj Stone Crusher v. Bank of India and others ). Since all these petitions involve a common question of law, they were heard together.

(2.) THE petitioners herein have prayed for quashing of possession notices dated 12-4-2008, Annexure P4 and 21-4-2008, Annex-ure P5, issued by the authorised officer of bank of India (respondent No. 2) under S. 13 (4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of security Interest Act, 2002 (in short "the act" ).

(3.) BRIEFLY stated the facts having rise to these petitions are that the petitioners are proprietorship firms and they own a stone crusher each. The petitioners for their business took financial assistance of huge amount from the respondent-Bank, and mortgaged immovable properties in the form of security against the loan. They, after paying some installments, committed defaults. The Bank, therefore, classified their accounts as non-performing assets and issued a notice dated 29-1-2007, Annexure P1, to each of them under S. 13 (2) of the Act giving details of the amount payable by them. By these notices the petitioners were required to discharge in full their liabilities within 60 days failing which the Bank became entitled to take action under sub-section (4) of S. 13. The petitioners, after receipt of the notice neither raised any objection nor discharged their full liabilities. They, however, paid some more installments which were accepted by the Bank after the expiry of 60 days. As the petitioners admittedly failed to discharge their full liabilities pursuant to the notice, the Bank has issued the impugned notices of taking over the possession of their secured assets.