Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1837 (MAD)

G. Saraswathi v. Punjab National Bank Rep. by the Chief Manager

2012-04-10

D.MURUGESAN, K.K.SASIDHARAN

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Though the petitioner has questioned the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengalpet made under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, in this writ petition, in our opinion, no adjudication is necessary in view of the subsequent development. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has to pay a sum of Rs.60,41,000/- to the first respondent-Bank. When the matter is being heard, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.43,00,000/-, which payment has been acknowledge by the first respondent-Bank and the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Bank also confirms the same. This leaves only a sum of Rs.17,41,000/-to be paid by the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit dated 8.4.2012 undertaking to pay the entire amount to the first respondent-bank in a period of eight weeks from today. The learned counsel for the first respondent Bank has also agreed for that course. 2. In view of the above, without adjudicating the impugned order, we permit the petitioner to pay the balance amount of Rs.17,41,000/-to the first respondent-Bank in a period of eight weeks from today without fail. In the event such payment is made, the respondent Bank shall discharge the petitioner from the debt due and payable to the Bank. It is brought to our notice that the petitioner is still in possession of the first floor of the building consisting of ground + 2 floors and the respondent Bank is in possession of the ground and second floor. Hence, the period of eight weeks prescribed in this order is only an outer limit and it is always open to the petitioner to make the balance payment even before the said period. If the balance amount is paid even at an early date, the first respondent-bank shall not only handover the possession of the ground and second floor of the building, but also the relevant title deeds to the petitioner. In the event the petitioner fails to make the payment within the outer limit, it is open to the first respondent Bank to proceed in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 are closed. No costs.