Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2014 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 1210 - HC - Indian LawsBank account declared as non-performing asset - request of the petitioning company for legal representation has been refused on the ground that the guidelines of the RBI do not provide for the same - committee on identification of wilful defaulters had identified it as a wilful defaulter - Held that:- The officers of the bank comprising the Committee are legally trained persons for which there could be a reasonable likelihood of a failure of justice, if the petitioning company were refused the permission to be represented by an advocate. Even if any or all the officers of the bank comprising the Committee are legally trained persons, the petitioning company does not stand at a disadvantage. It is inconceivable that the petitioning company does not have in its fleet an efficient and well versed company secretary and/or competent law officers. In the hearing to be conducted by the Committee, reasonably simple questions of fact as to by whom and how the finances of the petitioning company were handled and utilized, and where the funds have gone resulting in accumulation of dues, would fall for consideration, which a company secretary and/or law officers of fair intelligence and having knowledge of the conditions prevailing in the petitioning company would be able to disclose, for unearthing the truth. It is he/they who would be best suited to answer the queries of the Committee members or to raise effective defence and plead that the default has not been wilful and, therefore, question of declaring the petitioning company as a wilful defaulter does not and cannot arise. On the facts pleaded in the responses to the impugned notices forming part of the writ petition, the petitioning company can claim no right to be represented by an advocate at the hearing before the Committee. The writ petition is without merit and the same stands dismissed, without order for costs. Since the Committee adjourned the hearing scheduled on July 9, 2014 awaiting decision on this writ petition and it has now been dismissed, it shall be at liberty to fix a further date of hearing upon service of 72 hours advance notice on the petitioning company and its directors.Needless to observe, the Committee shall proceed to decide the issue before it in accordance with law and all other points are left open for being urged before it by the petitioning company.
|