BHARITIA TRADERS PVT LTD Vs. UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The four petitioners have taken out this writ petition for various reliefs, though their principal grievance is that possession of Flats 9D and 5R at premises No. 25B. Camac Street, Kolkata-700 016 was obtained by the Bank forcibly and without following the due process of law, that is, without following the process mentioned in the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement, of Security Interest Aet. 2002. S. 14. and hence a mandamus should be issued commanding restoration of possession.

(2.) The first petitioner owed the Bank around rupees three crore. Alleging that it was not liquidating the debt, the Bank issued notice under S. 13(2) dated August 3rd, 2005. In response the first petitioner submitted representation dated September 14th, 2005. Disposing of the representation the Bank sent its reply dated September 28th, 2005. Thereupon the bank issued a notice dated May 25th, 2006 under S. 13(4) of the Act. On the same day authorised officer took possession of the Flats. An inventory was prepared, and that was signed by the third petitioner.

(3.) The petitioners claim that alleging forcible dispossession they lodged a first information report with the police authority concerned on May 31st, 2006. By a letter dated June 3rd, 2006 the Bank requested the first petitioner to liquidate the debt. The fact of taking possession and preparation of inventory was mentioned in that letter. By a letter dated June 8th, 2006 the first petitioner bettered its offer. It requested the bank to settle the matter and restore possession of the Flats. By a reply dated June 15th, 2006 the Bank offered to settle the matter on the terms mentioned therein. The petitioners did not accept the proposal and took out this writ petition dated June 21st, 2006.