Reacting to the issue of FIR against some of the top officials of Saraswat Bank, the largest UCB in the country has revealed how a defaulter, when cornered, tries to badmouth the bank and how a gullible media falls for it without any sensible investigation.
It bears recall that a Director of Orange Medicare & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. (OMRC) filed an FIR in Pune against the top honchos of the bank including both the Chairman and the MD, among others.
OMRC, which took a loan from Saraswat Bank, has been a defaulter and has been trying to settle the matter with Saraswat Bank through the route of OTS but even here again it defaulted on repayment. The whole story, which reveals the sleaze of defaulters in the country, has been narrated by the UCB after the media began to publish a one-sided story.
In a press release, the Saraswat Bank says “This is to place before you the facts of the matter about the news being circulated on social media viz. WhatsApp etc. about the FIR being filed at Kothrud police station, Pune against the Bank’s Chairman, Managing Director, and other executives.
In this regard, we wish to inform you that the FIR has been filed by a Director of Orange Medicare & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. (OMRC) with the intention to create hurdles and to avoid loan recovery action of taking possession of the mortgaged property, etc. as per the latest order issued by Tahsildar in December 2021.
It has been a trend for some defaulting borrowers nowadays to create all sorts of hurdles including criminal charges against banks that are trying to recover their legitimate unpaid dues.
Saraswat Bank will NOT SUCCUMB to such pressure tactics and will pursue all legal remedies to take possession of the property of the defaulting company.
Under the provision of the SARFESSAI Act, we wish to place it on record that the said OMRC is the defaulter borrower of the Bank and at present, we have to recover around 16 crores from him. In this regard, Securitizing Officer of the Bank has initiated by issuing a notice of possession.
We wish to further state that the borrower tried to enter into OTS in the Bank however failed to repay an agreed amount and hence OTS failed. Therefore, apprehending that the Bank will take possession of the property, the borrower has filed this false case against its Chairman, Managing Director, and officials of the Bank.
We deny all the allegations made in the complaint and we will also ensure that the Bank will take all the steps to defend its action, its officials and take this case to its logical end.
Saraswat Bank in its release also gives the history of the account:
2011 – The OMRC was incorporated by 5 doctors and was granted a project loan by our Bank for the construction of the hospital and procuring medical equipment.
2013 – The directors could not complete the project in time resulting in an increase in project cost, to meet this Bank was granted an additional loan.
2016 – The project could not be completed and the account was declared NPA.
2017 – To tide over the financial crisis, the directors of OMRC introduced the Sameer Patil group of companies by giving 71% shareholding in the company and inducted Mrs. Smeeta Sameer Patil as a director on the Board (who is the complainant of the said FIR).
The group cleared only the overdues in the account and the principal remained unpaid hence the account was upgraded like a standard account.
Due to failure in honoring the repayment commitment the account was classified again as NPA and securitization proceedings were initiated.
2018 – District Magistrate, Pune issued a court order for physical possession of the mortgaged property. The physical possession was not taken as the company submitted a cheque of Rs 3.66 crore along with a proposal for One Time Settlement.
The OTS was approved by the Bank.
Directors individually paid Rs 2.50 crore.
The physical possession of the property was postponed at the company’s request.
The cheque of `3.66 crores given by the company was returned unpaid (Bounced), hence the Bank issued a notice under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act to OMRC.
The Tahsildar office issued various dates for taking possession of the property, however the same was not executed by the Tahsildar office.
A Contempt Petition filed by OMRC in Mumbai High Court against the Bank was also disposed of by the court.
The OMRC tried to delay the action of the Bank of taking possession of the property on various frivolous grounds.
2021 – The Tahsildar issued the order for possession of the property on 27th December.