AMIT RAJ ENTERPRISES Vs. UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Kalyan Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Rajen Raj, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents UCO Bank and with their consent, this application is being disposed of at this stage itself.

(2.) IN this writ application the petitioners have challenged the notices, issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to SRFAESI Act) dated 02/08/2006 for Rs. 50 lacs and odd against petitioner No. 1, for Rs. 99 lacs and odd against petitioner No. 2, for Rs. 4,55,124/ - against petitioner No. 3, for Rs. 1, 24, 729/ - against petitioner No. 4, by the respondent Bank giving 60 days notice to the petitioners to pay the respective amounts of outstanding dues standing against them, failing which, coercive action by taking possession of the secured assets of the borrowers including the right transferred by way of lease, assignment or sale etc. may be taken as provided under Section 13(4) of the SRFAESI Act.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, they applied to the Bank for liquidation of their clues under one time settlement scheme and offered an amount of Rs. 1.21 crores for settlement of their dues. According to them, the total amount of loan including all the petitioners comes to a sum of Rs. 1,53, 86,000/ - out of which they have already paid Rs. 50 lacs towards interest to the Bank. Further according to the petitioners, the respondent Bank by issue of letter dated 09/03/2007 (Annexure -2) asked the petitioners to deposit 25 % of the amount of offer of One Time Settlement which comes to Rs. 30.25 lacs in order to entertain the compromise proposal of the petitioners and in response thereto the petitioners deposited a sum of Rs. 5 lacs with the Bank and requested to allow 30 days time to deposit the rest of the amount.