Allowed

H.V.D Prasad v. Union Bank of India

Kerala HC13 Dec 2010WP(C)/35603/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner challenged SARFAESI proceedings initiated by the Respondent Bank due to default in a housing loan. The Court, noting a concession by the Bank for regularisation, disposed of the petition directing the Bank to keep recovery steps in abeyance pending payment of defaulted amounts in installments.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of directing the respondent Bank to keep all further steps of recovery in abeyance subject to the petitioner remitting defaulted amounts in three equal monthly installments.

H.V.D Prasad Vs Union Bank of India — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2010 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 35603 of 2010(A)

¶6

----------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

--------------------

¶9

H.V.D.PRASAD, FLAT NO.FF-6/27, VASANTH NAGAR, PALARIVATTOM P.O., KOCHI.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.S.MUMTAZ

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

---------------------

¶13

UNION BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNION BANK BHAVAN, PB NO.3667, MG ROAD, ERNAKULAM. COCHIN - 16..

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

svs

¶17

C.K. ABDUL REHIM,J.

¶18

W.P.(C)No. 35603 OF 2010

¶19

--------------------------------------

¶20

DATED THIS THE 13^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2010

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

Consequent to the default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. Immovable property which is the secured asset was proceeded against. According to the petitioner the loan in question was availed in the year 2008 and the repayment period is upto the year 2018. it is stated that, inspite of approaches made seeking permission for regularisation the loan account, the respondent Bank is taking hasty steps to proceed against the property. Hence interference of this Court is sought for.

¶23

Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Bank submitted an amount of Rs.6,20,000/- was availed in the year 2008 and the petitioner had defaulted

¶24

W.P.(C)No.35603/2010 -2-

¶25

payment of 35 monthly installments and the amount overdue for payment itself is around Rs.1.7 lakhs. However, it is conceded that if the petitioner remits the defaulted amounts within a short time, the petitioner can be permitted to continue future payments in terms of the original loan agreement.

¶26

Since the petitioner has not resorted to any statutory remedies provided, I am not inclined to interfere with the proceedings. However, in view of the stand taken by the respondent Bank, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to regularise the account by paying the arrears in default within a short time.

¶27

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery pursuant to Ext.P4 notice subject to condition of the petitioner remitting payment of the entire amounts in default (defaulted monthly installments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 3 (three) equal monthly installments, falling due on or before 15-01-2011

¶28

W.P.(C)No.35603/2010 -3-

¶29

and on or before the 15^th day of the two succeeding months.

¶30

The petitioner shall also make payment of the regular monthly installments due with respect fo the month concerned, along with payments as directed above.

¶31

If payment of the defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above then the respondents shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of the future monthly installments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. It is made clear that, on the event of default in payment of any one of the amounts stipulated above or any of the future installments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of notices already issued. It is also made clear that the petitioner in such case will be prevented from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings.

¶32

(Sd/-)

¶33

C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE

¶34

dnc

¶35

TRUE COPY

¶36

P.A. to Judge

H.V.D Prasad v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.V.D Prasad v. Union Bank of India

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

Sathy.L Vs Authorised Officer,S.B.I. and Another

T.Beena Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S. N.v.Chettiar Vs the Asst. Commissioner & Another

Janaki Vs the District Collector

T.a.Mounaguruswamy Vs Deputy Tahsildar

Santha.M.M. Vs Authorised Officer