GH HASSAN SOFI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are in arrears to respondent/Financial Corporation (State Financial Corporation) on account of loan borrowed by them in 1990 for purchase of Tourist vehicles repayment whereof allegedly suffered due to lack of sufficient income, attributable to the disturbed public order prevalent then, and claiming that said corporation was denying issuance of no objection certificate required for renewal of their permits by the concerned RTOs, they have instituted a writ petition being No. 608 of 2005 for certain directions to enable renewal of their route permits after which only they can ply their vehicles and liquidate the due outstanding etc.

(2.) DURING pendency of aforementioned petition, the respondent/State Financial Corporation appears to have decided to seize the mortgaged properties of defaulters besides taking legal action against them. In addition, they have also decided to send teams of officials alongwith drum beaters to residences of defaulters who would beat the drums before their residential and official premises, as reflected in a news item carried by daily "Alsafa" in its issue of 15. 02. 2006, a photocopy whereof has been furnished for record, and aggrieved thereby, the petitioners have, instituted this petition for prohibiting the proposed action of respondent/Corporation. During course of his brief submissions the petitioners counsel has contended that for liquidation of loan in case of petitioners, the Central Government has under a package relief scheme provided necessary funds to State Government, for helping failed loanees, benefit whereof is due to them also and under consideration at the appropriate level and accordingly the action proposed by respondents was not warranted.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel and considered the matter. In so far as the question of taking recourse to legal remedy available for recovery of amounts due from petitioners is concerned, the respondent/Corporation would no doubt be within its rights for doing the same as much as the petitioners would be to project all defenses available to them alongwith whatever benefits the Central or State Government may extend. So, that part of the matter cannot perhaps be considered at this stage when the proposed legal action is yet to be taken, what presently attracts attention is the unusual idea of respondent/Financial Corporation to send drum beating officials to residential and official premises of defaulters albeit as a measure of recovery proceedings. In this behalf it would be appropriate to observe that advancement of loan by financial institutions and recoveries in cases of default are all matters very well covered by different statutes and terms of the loan, so, ordinarily all measures of recoveries should flow therefrom only. Ay method outside their orbit can or be incidental thereto.