SURENDRA KUMAR SINGH Vs. UCO BANK & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner does not appear to be serious about his offer. He is just trying to adopt dilatory tactics by making illusory offers.

(2.) Initially in Jan., 2006 the petitioner offered to pay the outstanding amount to the respondent bank in installments within 12 months. If that offer has been accepted by the bank the payment would have been completed about two and half years ago. No payment was made by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner came to this Court by means of present writ petition and after hearing the parties on 12.8.2009 i.e. almost three months ago, this Court directed by an interim order that if the petitioner deposits with the respondent bank a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs, which represents roughly half of the amount than due, the proceedings under "The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002" against the petitioner will remain stayed. The petitioner did not deposit any worthwhile amount pursuant to that order and now the petitioner has approached this Court again saying that he is "prepared" to deposit the said amount of Rs. 10 lakhs through personal cheques, reliability of which would be very doubtful in view of the past conduct of the petitioner.

(3.) But apart from reliability of these cheques, the more important fact is that because of non-deposit of the amount required by the interim order, proceedings under the Securitisation Act continued and the property has been sold to a third party for a sum of about Rs. 17 lakhs.