Delhi High Court
Satpal Singh Kohli & Anr. vs Canara Bank on 22 February, 2023
Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
2023/DHC/001427
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13530/2022, CM APPL.41189/2022, CM APPL.
41190/2022 and CM APPL. 1648/2023
Date of Decision: 22.02.2023
IN THE MATTER OF:
SATPAL SINGH KOHLI
PROPRIETOR OF M/S PAL ENTERPRISES
S/O LATE SH. CHATTAR SINGH KOHLI
D-50, NARAINA VIHAR
NEW DELHI- 110028 ..... PETITIONER NO. 1
MONA KOHLI
W/O SH. SATPAL SINGH KOHLI
D-50, NARAINA VIHAR
NEW DELHI- 110028 ..... PETITIONER NO. 2
Through: Mr. Deepak Biswas and Mr. Manohar
Malik, Advocates.
Versus
CANARA BANK
THROUGH ASSISTANT GENERAL
NEW DELHI REGIONAL OFFICE,
DELHI TAMIL SANGAM BUILDING,
SECTOR-5, R.K. PURAM,
NEW DELHI- 110022 ..... RESPONDENT
Through: Mr. Arjun Malik, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRIYA
Signing Date:28.02.2023
10:52:07
2
JUDGMENT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties on application CM APPL. 1648/2023 seeking a vacation of the stay order dated 19.09.2022.
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent-bank states that, the instant petition is not maintainable against an order declaring the petitioner a Non- Performing Asset (in short, 'NPA'). He submits that on the first date of hearing i.e., on 19.09.2022, this court granted an ex-parte stay restraining the respondent-bank from proceeding further with the declaration of the petitioners' assets as NPA, which were already classified as NPA on 29.07.2022. According to him, after taking steps as per Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, 'the SARFAESI Act, 2002'), the further course of action is provided under the statute itself, and the petitioner was required to approach the concerned bank, making the representation or raising a grievance that was required to be considered by the respondent- bank. He states the petitioner cannot be allowed to halt the proceedings at the stage of section 13(3) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, itself. While placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phoenix ARC (P) Ltd. v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir1 he submits that the stay granted by this court vide order dated 19.09.2022, deserves to be vacated. While seeking dismissal of the instant petition, learned counsel has also pointed out that if the averments made in the stay vacation application are pursued, the same would clearly indicate that the petitioner has never 1 (2022) 5 SCC 345 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 3 made any representation pursuant to an action under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
3. Learned counsel for appearing for the petitioner opposes the aforesaid submission and he stated that the instant writ petition is maintainable and the writ court can still examine the aspect as to whether the petitioner has rightly been treated while declaring his account as NPA. According to him, there are various anomalies, and had the petitioner been put on notice, the petitioner would have clarified that there arises no necessity to proceed under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. He, therefore, states that not only the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Phoenix Arc (supra) has clearly held that in appropriate cases the writ court can still entertain the writ petition, but the High Court of Calcutta in the case of The Fabworth Promoters Private Limited and Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors.2 in Paragraph No. 25, thereto, has under similar circumstances, held that the remedy under writ jurisdiction is discretionary and can be granted by the writ court in the appropriate cases to do justice, which is based on the principle of equality. According to him, the High Court of Calcutta has entertained the writ petition even prior to any actions under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, and, therefore, he states that the submission made by the respondent-bank is not correct to contend that the writ petition itself is not maintainable.
4. I have heard the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.
5. Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 is reproduced as under:
13. Enforcement of security interest.-2
MANU/WB/0676/2021 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 4 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 69 or section 69A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882 ), any security interest created in favour of any secured creditor may be enforced, without the intervention of the court or tribunal, by such creditor in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
(2) Where any borrower, who is under a liability to a secured creditor under a security agreement, makes any default in repayment of secured debt or any instalment thereof, and his account in respect of such debt is classified by the secured creditor as non- performing asset, then, the secured creditor may require the borrower by notice in writing to discharge in full his liabilities to the secured creditor within sixty days from the date of notice failing which the secured creditor shall be entitled to exercise all or any of the rights under sub- section (4).
(3) The notice referred to in sub- section (2) shall give details of the amount payable by the borrower and the secured assets intended to be enforced by the secured creditor in the event of non-payment of secured debts by the borrower.
(4) In case the borrower fails to discharge his liability in full within the period specified in sub- section (2), the secured creditor may take recourse to one or more of the following measures to recover his secured debt, namely:-
(a) take possession of the secured assets of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale for realising the secured asset;
(b) take over the management of the secured assets of the borrower including the right to transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale and realise the secured asset;
(c) appoint any person (hereafter referred to as the manager), to manage the secured assets the possession of which has been taken over by the secured creditor;
(d) require at any time by notice in writing, any person who has acquired any of the secured assets from the borrower and from whom any money is due or may become due to the borrower, to pay the secured creditor, so much of the money as is sufficient to pay the secured debt. (5) Any payment made by any person referred to in clause (d) of sub- section (4) to the secured creditor shall give such person a valid discharge as if he has made payment to the borrower.
(6) Any transfer of secured asset after taking possession thereof or take over of management under sub- section (4), by the secured creditor or by the manager on behalf of the secured creditor shall vest in the transferee all rights in, or in relation to, the secured asset transferred as if the transfer had been made by the owner of such secured asset.
(7) Where any action has been taken against a borrower under the provisions of sub- section (4), all costs, charges and expenses which, in the opinion of the secured creditor, have been properly incurred by him or any Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 5 expenses incidental thereto, shall be recoverable from the borrower and the money which is received by the secured creditor shall, in the absence of any contract to the contrary, be held by him in trust, to be applied, firstly, in payment of such costs, charges and expenses and secondly, in discharge of the dues of the secured creditor and the residue of the money so received shall be paid to the person entitled thereto in accordance with his rights and interests.
(8) If the dues of the secured creditor together with all costs, charges and expenses incurred by him are tendered to the secured creditor at any time before the date fixed for sale or transfer, the secured asset shall not be sold or transferred by the s cured creditor, and no further step shall be taken by him for transfer or sale of that secure asset.
(9) In the case of financing of a financial asset by more than one secured creditors or joint financing of a financial asset by secured creditors, no secured creditor shall be entitled to exercise any or all of the rights conferred on him under or pursuant to sub- section (4) unless exercise of such right is agreed upon by the secured creditors representing not less than three- fourth in value of the amount outstanding as on a record date and such action shall be binding on all the secured creditors: Provided that in the case of a company in liquidation, the amount realised from the sale of secured assets shall be distributed in accordance with the provisions of section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956 ): Provided further that in the case of a company being wound up on or after the commencement of this Act, the secured creditor of such company, who opts to realise his security instead of relinquishing his security and proving his debt under proviso to sub- section (1) of section 529 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956 ), may retain the sale proceeds of his secured assets after depositing the workmen' s dues with the liquidator in accordance with the provisions of section 529A of that Act: Provided also that liquidator referred to in the second proviso shall intimate the secured creditor the workmen' s dues in accordance with the provisions of section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956 ) and in case such workmen' s dues cannot be ascertained, the liquidator shall intimate the estimated amount of workmen' s dues under that section to the secured creditor and in such case the secured creditor may retain the sale proceeds of the secured assets after depositing the amount of such estimate dues with the liquidator: Provided also that in case the secured creditor deposits the estimated amount of workmen' s dues, such creditor shall be liable to pay the balance of the workmen' s dues or entitled to receive the excess amount, if any, deposited by the secured creditor with the liquidator: Provided also that the secured creditor shall furnish an undertaking to the liquidator to pay the balance of the workmen' s dues, if any. Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub- section,-
(a) " record date" means the date agreed upon by the secured creditors representing not less than three- fourth in value of the amount outstanding on such date;Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 6
(b) " amount outstanding" shall include principal, interest and any other dues payable by the borrower to the secured creditor in respect of secured asset as per the books of account of the secured creditor. (10) Where dues of the secured creditor are not fully satisfied with the sale proceeds of the secured assets, the secured creditor may file an application in the form and manner as may be prescribed to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction or a competent court, as the case may be, for recovery of the balance amount from the borrower.
(11) Without prejudice to the rights conferred on the secured creditor under or by this section, secured creditor shall be entitled to proceed against the guarantors or sell the pledged assets without first taking any of the measured specifies in clause (a) to (d) of sub- section (4) in relation to the secured assets under this Act.
(12) The rights of a secured creditor under this Act may be exercised by one or more of his officers authorised in this behalf in such manner as may be prescribed.
(13) No borrower shall, after receipt of notice referred to in sub- section (2), transfer by way of sale, lease or otherwise (other than in the ordinary course of his business) any of his secured assets referred to in the notice, without prior written consent of the secured creditor.
6. In the case of Authorized office, State Bank of Travancore v. Mathew K.C.3 whereby, a writ petition was filed to stop the proceedings by challenging demand notices issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the writ petition should not be entertained. Paragraph No.15 and 16 read as under:-
"15. It is the solemn duty of the Court to apply the correct law without waiting for an objection to be raised by a party, especially when the law stands well settled. Any departure, if permissible, has to be for reasons discussed, of the case falling under a defined exception, duly discussed after noticing the relevant law. In financial matters grant of ex-parte interim orders can have a deleterious effect and it is not sufficient to say that the aggrieved has the remedy to move for vacating the interim order. Loans by financial institutions are granted from public money generated at the tax payers expense. Such loan does not become the property of the person taking the loan, but retains its character of public money given in a fiduciary capacity as entrustment by the public. Timely repayment also ensures liquidity to facilitate loan to another in need, by circulation of the money and cannot be permitted to be blocked by frivolous litigation by 3 (2018) 3 SCC 85 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 7 those who can afford the luxury of the same. The caution required, as expressed in Satyawati Tandon (supra), has also not been kept in mind before passing the impugned interim order:-
"46. It must be remembered that stay of an action initiated by the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities for recovery of taxes, cess, fees, etc. seriously impedes execution of projects of public importance and disables them from discharging their constitutional and legal obligations towards the citizens. In cases relating to recovery of the dues of banks, financial institutions and secured creditors, stay granted by the High Court would have serious adverse impact on the financial health of such bodies/institutions, which (sic will) ultimately prove detrimental to the economy of the nation.
Therefore, the High Court should be extremely careful and circumspect in exercising its discretion to grant stay in such matters. Of course, if the petitioner is able to show that its case falls within any of the exceptions carved out in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Antaim Zila Parishad AIR 1969 SC 556, Whirlpool Corpn v. Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 8 SCC 1 and Harbanslal Sahina v. Indian Oil Corpn.
Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 107and some other judgments, then the High Court may, after considering all the relevant parameters and public interest, pass an appropriate interim order."
16. The writ petition ought not to have been entertained and the interim order granted for the mere asking without assigning special reasons, and that too without even granting opportunity to the Appellant to contest the maintainability of the writ petition and failure to notice the subsequent developments in the interregnum. The opinion of the Division Bench that the counter affidavit having subsequently been filed, stay/modification could be sought of the interim order cannot be considered sufficient justification to have declined interference."
7. If one of the impugned notices in the instant case is perused, it would indicate that as per the bank from April 2022, the operation and conduct of the financial assistance/credit facilities became irregular. The secured creditor classified the account of the petitioner as a NPA as on 29.07.2022. The petitioner seeks to place reliance on RBI circular dated 12.11.2021 to state that the same has not been followed. According to the petitioner, before Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 8 the account becomes NPA, it should be first categorised as 'out of order' in case of CC/OD account, if there is no credit in the account continuously for 90 days to cover the interest debited during the same period. Various other averments have been made to indicate that the RBI circular has not been followed in declaring the petitioner's account as NPA.
8. The petitioner is essentially challenging the aspect of declaring and classifying its six accounts as NPA.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India4 addressed the question of adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in cases relating classification of NPA wherein it was held that the borrowers would get a reasonably fair deal and opportunity to get the matter adjudicated upon before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The effect of some of the provisions may be a bit harsh for some of the borrowers but on that ground alone, the impugned provisions of the Act cannot be said to be unconstitutional in view of the fact that the object of the Act is to achieve speedier recovery of the dues declared as NPAs and better availability of capital liquidity and resources to help in the growth of the economy of the country and welfare of the people in general which would subserve the public interest.
10. In view of the aforesaid case, the High Court, in the exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should not enter into the domain to adjudicate as to whether the particular account has rightly been declared as NPA or whether the concerned financial institution or the bank has committed an illegality while taking recourse of the law. All those issues will have to be left for consideration by the appropriate forum created under 4 (2004) 4 SCC 311 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 9 the SARFAESI Act, 2002. If this court starts entertaining the writ petition at the stage of declaring a particular account as NPA and granting a stay on one ground or the other, the ultimate effect would be to halt the entire recovery proceeding and frustrate the object of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
11. No doubt this court can entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the borrower can only challenge the action of a secured creditor under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, by filing an application under section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, when there is an action taken by the secured creditor and not otherwise. Writ remedy is a discretionary one and the High Court always has the discretion to refuse to grant any writ if it is satisfied that the aggrieved party can have an adequate efficacious remedy elsewhere. In the case in hand as per the stand taken by the bank, the limit was overdue since 30.04.2022 and the CC limit of the borrower was 'out of order' in terms of RBI circular as per point 6 (i) i.e., outstanding balance in the CC/OD account remains continuously in excess of the sanction limit and the drawing power was 90 days. In short, the respondent-bank claims to have complied with RBI circular.
12. In the decision in the matter of Fabworth (supra) by the High Court of Calcutta relied upon by the petitioner, the facts and situation was that without declaring borrower as NPA a notice under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was issued. The said decision would, therefore, have no application under the facts of the present case. Paragraph No.28 of the decision of Fabworth (supra) is reproduced as under:-
"28. In the instant case, having regard to the discussion above, and in consideration of submission made on behalf of the petitioners, this Court clearly finds that the notice under Section 13(2) of the Act on the threshold is bad in law in the sense that the notice has been issued without classifying the petitioner's account as NPA rather in the same Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07 10 notice the declaration has been made for classifying the account of the petitioner as NPA. This is no doubt in derogation of the directives of the Reserve Bank of India and so also the directives given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as discussed above."
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its various pronouncements such as United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tandon5has clearly held that the recovery proceeding, such as for loan, tax, etc., should not be halted by exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
14. The petitioner has a remedy to raise his grievances in terms of Section 13(4) (a) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, which admittedly has not been availed of.
15. In view thereof and under the facts of the present case, this court is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition at this stage leaving it open for the petitioner to raise his grievances in terms of Section 13(4)(a) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and if in case the petitioner has grievance thereafter the appropriate remedy would be under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
16. In view of the aforesaid case writ petition against impugned notices under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 08.08.2022 and 17.08.2022 by the respondent-bank is not entertained.
17. The petition itself stands disposed of alongwith pending applications with liberty to avail appropriate remedy in the aforesaid terms.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
FEBRUARY 22, 2023 Priya 5 (2010) 8 SCC 110 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:28.02.2023 10:52:07