Madhya Pradesh High Court
State Bank Of India vs Shri Harish Khandelwal Judgement Given ... on 12 December, 2013
W.A. No.296/2013
W.A. No.418/2013
12.12.2013
Shri Sunil Kherdikar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Sneh Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent
No.1.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, pursuant to the suggestions made by this Court, the private parties have arrived at an amicable settlement on the following terms:
(1) The respondent No.1 undertakes to pay sum of Rs.80,50,006.55 (Rs. Eighty lacs fifty thousand and six and fifty paisa only) to the appellant bank on or before 30.12.2013. This amount will be paid on the understanding that all the payments made in the past by the borrower or by the respondent No.1 have been duly adjusted and settled.
(2) The respondent No.1 is permitted to withdraw Rs.48,00,000/- (Rs. Forty eight lacs) deposited by him in the Registry of this Court along with interest accrued thereon forthwith to facilitate the respondent No.1 to pay the agreed amount of Rs.80,50,006.55 (Rs.Eighty lacs fifty thousand and six and fifty paisa only) to the appellant bank on or before 30.12.2013. (3) If the respondent No.1 deposits the amount before 30.12.2013, he will be entitled for commensurate adjustment of interest component to be paid to the respondent No.2-auction purchaser by way of settlement of his claim.
(4) Consequent to depositing the aforesaid amount by the appellant, the bank shall pay the agreed amount of Rs. 1,09,13,821.10 (Rs.One crore nine lacs thirteen thousand eight hundred twenty one and ten paisa only) to the respondent No.2-auction purchaser towards full and final settlement of his claim in respect of the auctioned property on or before 31.12.2013.
(5) On receipt of that amount, it is agreed that the sale deed registered in favour of the respondent No.2 in respect of property situated at Mansarovar Complex, Plot No.9, Shop Nos. G-8 & G-9, Nazul Sheet No.55-56 area 650 sq.ft., Chhindwara will stand nullified and non-est in terms of this order; and the ownership of the property shall deemed to have always vested in the respondent No.1-guarantor, who is the original owner of that property.
(6) The amount payable by the appellant bank to the respondent No.2-auction purchaser has been computed on the basis of @ 14.25% interest p.a. up to 31.12.2013, on the principal amount of Rs.84,61,000/- (Rs.Eighty four lacs sixty one thousand only) paid by the auction purchaser towards the sale proceeds of the property in question.
(7) This arrangement has been worked out between the Respondent No.1/Guarantor and the Respondent No.2/Auction purchaser inter se and the bank should have no objection to honour this commitment between the two private parties.
(8) The undertaking given by the appellant bank in this Court shall stand discharged on the appellant bank paying the amount to the Auction Purchaser within two bank working days from the receipt of the amount from the respondent No.1-guarantor.
(9) Further we direct the Branch Manager, State Bank of Chhindwara to receive the amount offered by the respondent No.1-be it by cash or bankers cheque or bank draft-on the date it is presented before him without taking any exception thereto or requiring the respondent No.1 to do some more formalities before accepting the amount so offered.
(10) Needless to observe that if the Respondent No.1- Guarantor fails to pay the stated amount on or before 30.12.2013, the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge shall be treated as set aside in terms of this order passed, by consent. As a result of which the auction sale in favour of the respondent No.2 shall remain undisturbed and the respondent No.2 would be entitled to possession of the subject property. The respondent No.1 further undertakes to abide by this condition and to handover peaceful possession of the property to the auction purchaser within two weeks from 31.12.2013 and upon receipt of the entire amount of Rs.1,09,13,821.10 (Rs.One crore nine lacs thirteen thousand eight hundred twenty one and ten paisa only) on or before 30.12.2013. Assurance given by the Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.2 through their respective counsel is accepted and placed on record.
We dispose of the appeal on this understanding. C.C. as per rules.
(A.M. Khanwilkar) (Krishn Kumar Lahoti)
Chief Justice Judge
snb/-