BORROWERS ASSETS LOOTED FROM BANK CUSTODY That, SBI Guwahati Moduel issued Sarfaesi Notice against the borrower in November 2006 and attached his immovable and movable assets in breach of One time settlement agreement on fabricated grounds. That, Borrower’s only offence was that his unit issued notice to Bank to supply their previous statements of account as Bank had ignored their all requests and reminders... Later, SBI invited a public AUCTION and in absence of any public participation sold and purchased the immovable assets to itself in February 2007, in flagrant violation of Sarfaesi Act. However, mysteriously Bank did not sale movable assets and retained the same in its custody. Subsequently in 2014 Bank declared the borrower Willful defaulter on the plea of diversion of fund for Rs.13 Lacs only but at the same time intimated borrower about loss of their movable assets/ stocks worth Rs.120 Lacs from Bank’s custody. That , Bank failed to substantiate the reason of loss and at any cost did not allow borrower to verify his balance assets in their custody . That, Bank had caused huge loss to borrower in the form of machineries and equipment than what was due from the borrower. That, Bank failed in its duty to protect borrowers assets as a person of ordinary prudence against the stipulations laid down in the Sarfaesi Act. That , Bank suppressed the movable assets worth crores from DRT and was successful in obtaining a Recovery certificate. That, borrower filed a FIR against bank as Bank was reluctant to allow him inspect his remaining movable assets in Banks custody. That, to stall the investigation , instead, SBI filed a Quashing petition in 2016 in Guwahati high court. That, Bank lost its Sarfaesi appeal in 2018 and DRAT declared purported public auction as illegal malafide and arbitrary with a liberty to bank for resale . That, O.A appeal is still pending for adjudication. That, subsequently after the DRAT Judgment ,Guwahati High court in its judgment quashed the F.I.R but ordered Police to make investigations in the matter. That , in the Police investigations entire movable assets of the borrower worth crores of rupees were found looted .The loss was caused more than the one admitted by SBI and mentioned in the F.I.R. That, Bank have now filed a F.I.R. to avert its responsibilities against their Security agencies. That, police investigation is pending for further investigation of ware house of the borrower. Despite the fact that borrowers assets has been looted from the custody of the Bank , Bank is still pursuing sale of assets. Now it is for the legal luminaries to comment whether at this instance can SBI pursue sale of immovable assets though borrower"s assets were looted from the custody of the Bank due to reckless and willful negligence on the part of the Bank.
VIJAY GOENKA
