Allowed

E.K.Sivadasan v. the Manager, Kerala Financial Cor

Kerala HC15 Oct 2008WP(C)/19345/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court, in a writ petition, held that coercive proceedings against the petitioner's personal properties attached by Kerala Financial Corporation should be kept in abeyance for six months. The Court directed the KFC to first attempt recovery from mortgaged properties before proceeding against the petitioner's personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is directed to keep in abeyance further coercive proceedings against his personal properties for six months; KFC directed to attempt recovery from mortgaged properties.

E.K.Sivadasan Vs the Manager, Kerala Financial Cor — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 19345 of 2008(C)

¶6

¶7

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶8

E.K.SIVADASAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O. KANNIKULANGARA, KONOTTUKUNNU, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, TRICHUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.PRIYA DEVI.P SMT.LEKSHMI SWAMINATHAN SMT.BEATRICE FERIA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

¶12

THE MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION,BRANCH OFFICE, K.M.M.COMPLEX, KOKKALA JUNCTION, THRISSUR. PIN:680021.

¶13

ADDL.R2

¶14

THE TAHASILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, THRISSUR. (Impleaded vide order dated 13.8.08 in I.A.10394/08)

¶15

SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC FOR R1

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

V.GIRI, J

¶18

W.P.(C).19345/2008

¶19

Dated this the 15^th day of October, 2008

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Petitioner claims to be the Chairman and one of the share holders of Aswas Hospital in Thrissur, which is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is stated that the total share capital of the Company is Rs.2,00,00,000/-. Company owned 52.5 cents of land with a building of 33,000 Sq. feet. The said property was given as security by the Company to the KFC to avail a loan facility. Another property having an extent of 5 Acres of land with 3000 Sq.feet marbled house was also given as security to the respondent for availing a loan of Rs.75,00,000/- from the KFC. Repayment of the loan was defaulted and KFC took possession of 52.5 cents of land and the building belonging to the Company, under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act.

¶22

The grievance of the petitioner is regarding the steps taken by the KFC in proceeding against the

¶23

W.P.(C).19345/2008

¶24

¶25

personal properties. He has filed Ext.P3 representation to the KFC to lift the attachment. But that has not been considered. Hence the writ petition.

¶26

Counter affidavit has been filed by the KFC inter alia pointing out that the balance outstanding in the loan account as on 1.7.2008 is Rs.1,59,02,002/- and the petitioner has executed a personal guarantee for the repayment of the loan availed by the Company.

¶27

Having heard learned counsel on both sides, I am of the view that in the nature of the security offered by the petitioner, it would be appropriate that the KFC proceeds against the mortgaged property in the first instance. Personal properties of the petitioner are under attachment but further proceedings may be deferred till the KFC makes a genuine effort to recover its dues by proceeding against the property offered as security.

¶28

In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing

¶29

W.P.(C).19345/2008

¶30

¶31

the respondents to keep in abeyance further coercive proceedings against the personal properties of the petitioner for a period of six months from today. In the meanwhile, KFC shall take all efforts possible to recover its dues from the properties mortgaged by the defaulter. It is made clear that if the mortgaged properties are either found to be inadequate to satisfy the debt or the KFC otherwise finds it impossible to recover its dues from the mortgaged properties, they shall be entitled to issue notice to the petitioner stating those reasons and then proceed against his properties, in accordance with law.

¶32

V.GIRI, Judge

¶33

mrcs

E.K.Sivadasan v. the Manager, Kerala Financial Cor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.K.Sivadasan v. the Manager, Kerala Financial Cor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

District Collector, Tvm. Vs Sarojini Amma

N.S.S.Training College Vs N.C.T.E

Sreelal Devraj Vs Kerala State Film Devlopment Corporation

P.I.Prabhakaran Vs the R.T.a., Ernakulam

Suhrabi Vs Secretary, the Land Tribunal, Kozhikode

Visalakshmi Amma Vs the Geologist, Dept. of Mining & Geology