TRISOLE INDIA PHARMACEUTICALS Vs. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner challenging letter dated 23.12.2010 (Annexure-13) issued by the Chief Manager, United Commercial Bank, Main Branch, Patna (Respondent No. 3) by which the Petitioner's objection under Section 13(3)(A) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SARFAESI Act' for the sake of brevity) was disposed of and also challenging notice dated 4.11.2010 (Annexure-11) issued by the authorities to the Petitioner-firm under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and further for directing the authorities of the Bank to allow the Petitioner and the Department of Industries (Respondent No. 6) to carve out a scheme of rehabilitation of the entire industry and for restraining the Respondents, especially the Respondent-Bank, from taking any further action of recovery of outstanding loan due from the Petitioner-firm during the pendency of the rehabilitation endeavours and for other ancillary reliefs.

(2.) The claim of the Petitioner is that it is a proprietorship firm established in the year 2006 for manufacturing of Ethical Pharma Products and Branded Generic Products having its factory unit located at Plot No. D-42/43 Phase-II, Industrial Area, Hajipur (Vaishali) for which he applied for loan before the Respondent-United Commercial Bank which sanctioned cash credit of Rs. 13,00,000/- and term loan of Rs. 45,00,000/- against securities furnished by the proprietor. It is also stated that industrial unit of the Petitioner functioned properly, but subsequently due to some unavoidable market factors, the capital infrastructure of the Petitioner firm got disturbed due to which it required further financial inputs.

(3.) It is also claimed by the Petitioner that in the abovementioned circumstances it approached the Respondent-Bank in the year 2007 for providing financial and policy aids in order to assist the industrial unit to maintain its pace of production activity, but the Respondent-Bank did not respond and sent a letter dated 16.6.2008 to the Petitioner directing him to regularize the existing cash credit and term loan account. It is also submitted that thereafter in the year 2008 and 2009 the Petitioner reiterated its requests before the authorities of the Bank for survival of the industry, but when there was No. response, the Petitioner sent letter dated 12.5.2010 to the General Manager, Reserve Bank of India for providing necessary revival doses to the Petitioner-unit bringing to its notice the attitude of the Respondent-United Commercial Bank and only thereafter the Respondent-Bank vide letter dated 18.9.2010 (Annexure-6) denied the possibility, of rehabilitation of the Petitioner-firm.