Disposed

Mohamedkunhi v. the Canara Bank

Kerala HC25 Mar 2010WP(C)/5889/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the bank's recovery actions under the SARFAESI Act. The court directed the petitioners to clear the overdue amount by March 31, 2010, with the consequent obligation on the bank to issue an NPA clearance certificate within one week.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to clear overdue amount by March 31, 2010; Respondent Bank to issue NPA clearance certificate within one week of payment.

Mohamedkunhi Vs the Canara Bank — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932

¶5

WP(C).No. 5889 of 2010(I)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONERS

¶8

¶9

MR.MOHAMEDKUNHI, PROPERIETOR, SULFEX MATTRESS COMPANY, PARASSINIKKADAVU, KANNUR.

¶10

M/S.SULFEX FIBER PRODUCTS, ANDOOR, PARASSINIKKADAVU, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶12

SMT.LAKSHMI RAJAN

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

¶15

THE CANARA BANK, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, MAIN BRANCH, KANNUR,

¶16

THE CHIEF MANAGER, CANARA BANK, MAIN BRANCH, KANNUR.

¶17

BY ADV. MR. P. GOPINATH MENON

¶18

ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR ADV. SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI ADV. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS ADV. SRI.S.RAMU

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶21

W.P.(C) No. 5889 OF 2010

¶22

......................................................................... Dated this the 25^th March 2010

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the

¶25

steps taken by the respondent Bank for realisation of the amount stated as due from the petitioners by resorting to the remedy available under the SARFAESI Act . The contentions raised in the Writ Petition, particularly as to the status of the account as 'NPA' are vehemently rebutted from the part of the Bank by filing a statement referring to the actual facts and figures. It is contended that the account of petitioners was declared as 'NPA' in conformity with the statutory requirement and also the guidelines issued by the RBI on the point.

¶26

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to clear the 'overdue' amount on or before 31.03.2010 and the liability is intended to be taken over by another Bank, for which issuance of a certificate by the respondent Bank is necessary declaring it as 'outside the purview

¶27

W.P.(C) No. 5889 OF 2010

¶28

¶29

of 'NPA''. Reliance is also placed on the master circular issued by the RBI bearing No.RBI/2009-10/39 DBOD No.BP.BC 17/21.04.048/2009-10. As per the said Circular, the learned Counsel submits that once the overdue amount is cleared , the account is liable to be taken outside the purview of 'NPA' and hence that on clearing the overdue amount as above, the respondent bank might be directed to issue the requisite certificate as sought for . The learned Counsel appearing for the Bank submits that with respect to the first petitioner, the overdue amount is nearly 12.90 lakhs, whereas in the case of the second petitioner, the entire amount is overdue and the outstanding liability is to the tune of Rs. 20.85 lakhs.

¶30

Taking note of the submission that they are ready and willing to satisfy the entire overdue amount on or before 31.03.2010, the petitioners are directed to satisfy the said amount on or before 31.03.2010 as undertaken by them, on which event , the first respondent shall give effect to the Circular

¶31

issued by the RBI and issue the required certificate to the petitioners forthwith at any rate within one week from the

¶32

W.P.(C) No. 5889 OF 2010

¶33

¶34

clearance of the overdue amount as above.

¶35

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶36

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶37