Calcutta High Court
K K Banijya Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 20 April, 2021
Author: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
Bench: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
OD-7
ORDER SHEET
WPO 149 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
K K BANIJYA PVT LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
Date : 20TH April, 2021
Appearance:
Ms. Manju Bhuteria, Adv.
Mr. Anurag Mitra, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Shneya Chowdhury, Adv.
...for the petitioner
Mr. Sukanta Ghosh, Adv.
..for the Respondent No. 1
Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Adv.
...for the Respondent No. 4 (National Housing Bank) Mr. Arnab Mullick, Adv.
...for the Respondent No. 5The Court : The writ petitioner has made out sufficient prima facie case for the writ petition to be heard on merits inter alia on the question whether the 2 respondent No. 5 was justified in turning down the petitioner's request for one- time restructuring/realignment of the loan for reasons unknown to law and de hors the relevant circulars of the RBI and in taking further coercive steps on the loan taken by the petitioner without deciding on the request for one-time restructuring on its merits.
Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5, against whom the interim reliefs have been primarily sought, argues that the petitioner has already abided by the leave given by the Bank Ombudsman by approaching respondent No. 4. That apart, learned Counsel for respondent No. 5 argues that the security given by the petitioner is not adequate or properly recognized by the extant rules. Learned Counsel also argues that the petitioner failed to repay some instalments of EMIs, for which the interim relief sought ought not to be granted at this stage.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 4 respectively also controverts the allegations made in the writ petition. However, the writ petition is required to be heard adequately on its merits upon exchange of affidavits in view of factual disputes having been raised by the parties.
It is made clear that this order shall not prevent the respondent No. 5 from reconsidering the request of the petitioner for restructuring/realignment of the loan in terms of the relevant guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. If such an exercise is undertaken, the same will be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the writ petition.
3
Accordingly, the respondents are directed to file their affidavit(s)-in- opposition within three weeks from date. Affidavit-in-reply, if any, shall be filed within a week thereafter. The respondent No. 5 shall be restrained from taking coercive steps or legal action on the basis of the post-dated cheque bearing No. 000100 handed over to the respondent No. 5 as security deposit, in terms of prayer (d) of the writ petition, till June 30, 2021 or until further order, whichever is earlier.
The matter shall be enlisted next on June 15, 2021 for hearing.
(SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.) Sbghosh