High Court

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This contempt application has been filed for violation of orders passed by this Court dated 6.6.2024 in Writ Petition No. 5284 of 2024, which is quoted as under :- "Heard Sri R.D. Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent bank. By means of instant petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the order/notice dated 13.5.2024, under Section/Rule-8(1) and 8(2) of SERFASAI Act, issued by opposite party No.1 (i.e. Authorized Offcer) stressed Assets Recovery, 2-Tilak Marg, 2nd Floor, opposite National P.G. College, Lucknow, contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition, in the interest of justice and circumstances of the case. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the notice dated 30.5.2024 whereby the opposite parties are illegally and arbitrarily going to auction/sale the house of the petitioners, as contained in Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to provide the actual amounts of loan account No.30968287808 and account No.36819695939 separately, by calculating and adjusting the amount recovered by them through high level interest, since 5.12.2012 till date. Further direct the opposite parties to correct both home loan account SO that the petitioners may be able to depsoit easily and suitably." However, at the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as the petitioner is concerned, he has been making required deposits in his loan account and even the last installment was paid on 26.03.2024. It has also been pointed out that in earlier point of time certain amount was outstanding and the petitioner deposited the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in his account, which has been accepted by the bank but once again an outstanding has been shown and the property of the petitioner which was a secured asset, has been subjected to auction which is scheduled to be held on 08.07.2024. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is ready to make the necessary payments so that his account can be regularized and since the auction notice has been issued which will create complications hence in order to show the bonafide, the petitioner is ready to deposit the outstanding sum. Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the bank has sought instructions and has informed the Court that a sum or Rs.3.20 lakhs is over due and in case if the aforesaid sum is paid, the account would be regularized and the petitioner will be entitled to continue to deposit the installments as being done. Learned counsel for the petitioner has given his consensus that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.3.20 lakhs to regularize his account by 01.07.2024 and he further seeks the liberty to move an appropriate application before the bank authorities in order to get his account settled. Considering the consensus which has been arrived at by the parties, this Court, at this stage, does not deem appropriate to keep the matter pending rather dispose of the petition recording the statement of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent bank that in case if the petitioner deposits the sum or Rs 3.20 lakhs by 01.07.2024, the auction as scheduled on 08.07.2024, in respect of petitioner's property shall not be held. It shall be open for the petitioner to approach the banking authorities for regularization/settlement of his account which shall be considered sympathetically. In case the petitioner does not comply with the aforesaid order he shall not be entitled to the benefits as provided herein-above and the bank authorities will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. With the aforesaid the petition is disposed of. "

2. In compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 6.6.2024, petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 3.20 lakhs before the date mentioned in the order i.e. 1.7.2024. Thereafter, another order was passed by this Court in Contempt Application (Civil) No.2814 of 2024 on 24.9.2024, which is quoted as under :- "1. In pursuance of earlier order, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Chief Manager, S.B.I. Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Lucknow is present.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in Loan Account No.30968287808, installments could not be deposited timely, therefore, said account was declared as N.P.A., as a result, two other Loan Accounts, i.e., Housing Loan Account No.36819695939 (co-borrower) & Housing Loan Suraksha Account No. 36819728831 were also declared as N.P.A. He also submits that as the grievance of the applicant is not being addressed by the Bank authorities then Writ C No.5284 of 2024 was filed for regularizing the irregular account, i.e., 30968287808 and also challenging the notice, in which, details of all the accounts were mentioned. He further submits that aforesaid petition was disposed of on 6.6.2024 with a direction that if the petitioner deposits Rs.3.20 lakhs by 1.7.2024 in the irregular account, then auction as scheduled shall not be held.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Rs.3.20 lakh were deposited on 26.7.2024 and thereafter, Rs.81,000/- was also deposited in the saving bank account of the applicant and the bank has transferred the amount by distributing the same in three loan accounts on their own but aforesaid amount was to be transferred in the irregular Loan Account No. 30968287808. He also submits that applicant is ready to deposit the rest of the due amount.

4. Sri Alok Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the respondent submits that as per the R.B.I. guidelines in case, one loan account is declared as N.P.A., then all the loan accounts of the borrower be also treated as N.P.A. and therefore, aforesaid amount was deposited in three loan accounts but he does not dispute this fact that irregularity in depositing the installments was found in Loan Account No. 30968287808 and the request of the applicant for transferring the aforesaid amount in aforesaid loan account will be executed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is ready to transfer Rs. 3.20 lakh in the irregular loan Account No.30968287808 and he is also ready to deposit rest of the amount, i.e., lump-sum amounting Rs.1.23 lakhs within a week.

6. List this case case on 4.10.2024 at 2:30 P.M.

7. By the next date of listing, applicant shall file affidavit that he has deposited the rest amount of Rs.1.23 lakhs in Loan Account No.30968287808 and it is also expected that Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Chief Manager, S.B.I. Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Lucknow, who is present today shall consider the case of the applicant sympathetically. "

3. In para 5 of the aforesaid order, it has been noted that learned counsel for the applicants submitted that they are ready to transfer the amount of Rs.3.20 lakhs in regular loan account being A/c No.30968287808 and they are ready to deposit the rest of amount i.e. lump-sum amount of Rs.1.23 lakhs within a week. The said amount has been deposited as prayed by learned counsel for the applicants within time. It was directed by this Court that in case such deposit is made, his case will be considered sympathetically.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the S.B.I. has submitted that after the deposit being made by the applicants on 24.9.2024, his irregular A/c No.30968287808 was settled by the Bank and 'No Due Certificate' in respect of that account has been given to the applicants by the Bank.

6. This fact has been admitted by learned Counsel for the applicants, however, he further submitted that two other accounts which were regular at the time when his first account, mentioned above, was irregular was also declared NPA and now those accounts have become irregular because of money deposited by the applicant in the aforesaid account was adjusted towards this account.

7. Be that as it may be, since the direction was confined to the irregular A/c No.30968287808 only, no further relief can be granted to the applicants in the present contempt application and the contempt application is consigned to record.

8. Notices, if any, are discharged.

9. However, in case applicants are aggrieved by any action taken against the applicants by the Bank, which according to them is not in accordance with law, the applicants will have full liberty to challenge the same before appropriate forum, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.]

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This contempt application has been filed for violation of orders passed by this Court dated 6.6.2024 in Writ Petition No. 5284 of 2024, which is quoted as under :- "Heard Sri R.D. Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent bank. By means of instant petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the order/notice dated 13.5.2024, under Section/Rule-8(1) and 8(2) of SERFASAI Act, issued by opposite party No.1 (i.e. Authorized Offcer) stressed Assets Recovery, 2-Tilak Marg, 2nd Floor, opposite National P.G. College, Lucknow, contained in Annexure No.1 to this writ petition, in the interest of justice and circumstances of the case. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the notice dated 30.5.2024 whereby the opposite parties are illegally and arbitrarily going to auction/sale the house of the petitioners, as contained in Annexure No.2 to the writ petition. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to provide the actual amounts of loan account No.30968287808 and account No.36819695939 separately, by calculating and adjusting the amount recovered by them through high level interest, since 5.12.2012 till date. Further direct the opposite parties to correct both home loan account SO that the petitioners may be able to depsoit easily and suitably." However, at the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as the petitioner is concerned, he has been making required deposits in his loan account and even the last installment was paid on 26.03.2024. It has also been pointed out that in earlier point of time certain amount was outstanding and the petitioner deposited the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in his account, which has been accepted by the bank but once again an outstanding has been shown and the property of the petitioner which was a secured asset, has been subjected to auction which is scheduled to be held on 08.07.2024. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is ready to make the necessary payments so that his account can be regularized and since the auction notice has been issued which will create complications hence in order to show the bonafide, the petitioner is ready to deposit the outstanding sum. Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the bank has sought instructions and has informed the Court that a sum or Rs.3.20 lakhs is over due and in case if the aforesaid sum is paid, the account would be regularized and the petitioner will be entitled to continue to deposit the installments as being done. Learned counsel for the petitioner has given his consensus that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.3.20 lakhs to regularize his account by 01.07.2024 and he further seeks the liberty to move an appropriate application before the bank authorities in order to get his account settled. Considering the consensus which has been arrived at by the parties, this Court, at this stage, does not deem appropriate to keep the matter pending rather dispose of the petition recording the statement of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent bank that in case if the petitioner deposits the sum or Rs 3.20 lakhs by 01.07.2024, the auction as scheduled on 08.07.2024, in respect of petitioner's property shall not be held. It shall be open for the petitioner to approach the banking authorities for regularization/settlement of his account which shall be considered sympathetically. In case the petitioner does not comply with the aforesaid order he shall not be entitled to the benefits as provided herein-above and the bank authorities will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. With the aforesaid the petition is disposed of. "

2. In compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 6.6.2024, petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 3.20 lakhs before the date mentioned in the order i.e. 1.7.2024. Thereafter, another order was passed by this Court in Contempt Application (Civil) No.2814 of 2024 on 24.9.2024, which is quoted as under :- "1. In pursuance of earlier order, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Chief Manager, S.B.I. Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Lucknow is present.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in Loan Account No.30968287808, installments could not be deposited timely, therefore, said account was declared as N.P.A., as a result, two other Loan Accounts, i.e., Housing Loan Account No.36819695939 (co-borrower) & Housing Loan Suraksha Account No. 36819728831 were also declared as N.P.A. He also submits that as the grievance of the applicant is not being addressed by the Bank authorities then Writ C No.5284 of 2024 was filed for regularizing the irregular account, i.e., 30968287808 and also challenging the notice, in which, details of all the accounts were mentioned. He further submits that aforesaid petition was disposed of on 6.6.2024 with a direction that if the petitioner deposits Rs.3.20 lakhs by 1.7.2024 in the irregular account, then auction as scheduled shall not be held.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Rs.3.20 lakh were deposited on 26.7.2024 and thereafter, Rs.81,000/- was also deposited in the saving bank account of the applicant and the bank has transferred the amount by distributing the same in three loan accounts on their own but aforesaid amount was to be transferred in the irregular Loan Account No. 30968287808. He also submits that applicant is ready to deposit the rest of the due amount.

4. Sri Alok Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the respondent submits that as per the R.B.I. guidelines in case, one loan account is declared as N.P.A., then all the loan accounts of the borrower be also treated as N.P.A. and therefore, aforesaid amount was deposited in three loan accounts but he does not dispute this fact that irregularity in depositing the installments was found in Loan Account No. 30968287808 and the request of the applicant for transferring the aforesaid amount in aforesaid loan account will be executed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is ready to transfer Rs. 3.20 lakh in the irregular loan Account No.30968287808 and he is also ready to deposit rest of the amount, i.e., lump-sum amounting Rs.1.23 lakhs within a week.

6. List this case case on 4.10.2024 at 2:30 P.M.

7. By the next date of listing, applicant shall file affidavit that he has deposited the rest amount of Rs.1.23 lakhs in Loan Account No.30968287808 and it is also expected that Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Chief Manager, S.B.I. Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Lucknow, who is present today shall consider the case of the applicant sympathetically. "

3. In para 5 of the aforesaid order, it has been noted that learned counsel for the applicants submitted that they are ready to transfer the amount of Rs.3.20 lakhs in regular loan account being A/c No.30968287808 and they are ready to deposit the rest of amount i.e. lump-sum amount of Rs.1.23 lakhs within a week. The said amount has been deposited as prayed by learned counsel for the applicants within time. It was directed by this Court that in case such deposit is made, his case will be considered sympathetically.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the S.B.I. has submitted that after the deposit being made by the applicants on 24.9.2024, his irregular A/c No.30968287808 was settled by the Bank and 'No Due Certificate' in respect of that account has been given to the applicants by the Bank.

6. This fact has been admitted by learned Counsel for the applicants, however, he further submitted that two other accounts which were regular at the time when his first account, mentioned above, was irregular was also declared NPA and now those accounts have become irregular because of money deposited by the applicant in the aforesaid account was adjusted towards this account.

7. Be that as it may be, since the direction was confined to the irregular A/c No.30968287808 only, no further relief can be granted to the applicants in the present contempt application and the contempt application is consigned to record.

8. Notices, if any, are discharged.

9. However, in case applicants are aggrieved by any action taken against the applicants by the Bank, which according to them is not in accordance with law, the applicants will have full liberty to challenge the same before appropriate forum, in accordance with law. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Rishabh [Manish Kumar Nigam, J.]