HARINDER FABRICS Vs. SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The present writ petition has been filed challenging the possession notice dtd. 24/6/2021 (Annexure P-3) issued under Sec. 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and for consideration of representations dtd. 30/3/2021, 28/9/2021 and 21/4/2022 (Annexures P-2 to P-5) for One Time Settlement submitted by the petitioner.

(2.) As per the version of the petitioner, he had availed business loan from the respondent vide Customer IDH0270141, Agreement No. CDLD3TF1904030001 dated 23.03.2019and took loan of Rs.68,00,000.00, and mortgaged its property as a collateral security. The petitioner could not pay regular installments due to Covid 19 as such the account of the petitioner-firm was declared NPA on 3/2/2020. The respondent issued Demand Notice dtd. 11/8/2020 (Annexure P-1) under Sec. 13(2) of the Act and raised a demand of Rs.75,02,583.00 as on 10/8/2020. The petitioner submitted a representation dtd. 30/3/2021 (Annexure P-2) and requested for One Time Settlement at Rs.35.00 lakhs. However, the respondent-financial institution issued a possession notice under Sec. 13(4) of the Act (Anneuxre P-3). The petitioner-firm again submitted a request letter dtd. 28/9/2021 (Annexure P-4) and again offered for One Time Settlement. The said proposal was neither accepted nor rejected. The petitioner-firm again submitted third representation dtd. 21/4/2022 (Annexure P-5) with the same proposal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the declaration of the loan account as NPA was against Master Circular Prudential Norms on Income Recognition, Asset Classification and Provisioning pertaining to Advances dtd. 2/7/2013.