Disposed

Shabeer Ali v. the Manager,State Bank of India

Kerala HC25 Mar 2010WP(C)/8248/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposed of a writ petition challenging a bank's coercive steps under the SARFAESI Act. The court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs and clear the balance in six equal monthly installments, allowing further steps only upon default.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs within two weeks and clear the balance in six equal monthly installments.

Shabeer Ali Vs the Manager,State Bank of India — 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. 8248 of 2010(E)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

SHABEER ALI, S/O.T.MOHAMMED ALI, "SAPHIRE", THURAKKAL HOUSE, TANUR ROAD, PARAPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI

SMT.MALU JOHN

RESPONDENTS:

THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, PARAPPANANGADI BRANCH, THAPPY'S TOWER, COURT ROAD, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 303.

¶15

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, IST FLOOR, SOUTHERN TRADE TOWER, PUSHPA JN., FRANCIS ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 002.

¶16

BY ADV. MR. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC.

¶17

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

¶18

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶19

W.P.(C) No. 8248 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 25^th March, 2010

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

The petitioner had availed a 'Cash Credit facility' from the respondent Bank . The petitionber was a defaulter who did not choose to effect any payment and there was no remittance at all from the year 2003, as a result of which there was no renewal of the Account as well. It is stated that there was no business at all, having closed the same in the year 2004, under which circumstance, the account was declared as 'NPA' in Novermber, 2005.

¶22

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the property offered as security was of his father and that when the coercive steps were taken, the father of the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.25444 of 2008, which resulted in Ext.P3 judgment, whereby a sum of Rs. Four lakhs was directed to be paid and the balance by way of installments.

¶23

¶24

W.P.(C) No. 8248 OF 2010

¶25

Evn though the father of the petitioner remited a sum of 3.75 lakhs though belatedly, the earnest effort taken in this regard was not appreciated by the Bank who chose to continue with the coercive steps . The learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that even after filing the Writ Petition, the petitioner has effected some payments by remitting a sum of Rs.One lakh and that the steps being pursued for physical dispossession and to have the property sold in public auction is not correct or sustainable .

¶26

The learned Counsel for the respondent Bank submits taht the course and procedure pursued by the petitioner is liable to be deprecated . It is stated that after declaraton of the account as NPA in 2005, the Bank provided sufficient time to clear the liability and notice was issued to clear the due amount on 22.04.2008, followed by Section 13(2) notice . It was thereaftrer the matter was subjected to challenge by the petitioner's father who owned the property by filing the W.P.(C) No. 25444 of 2008, which led to Ext P3 judgment. Even after extension of time vide Ext. P3(a), it was not complied with and

¶27

¶28

W.P.(C) No. 8248 OF 2010

¶29

in the said circumstances, there was no other alternative for the Bank but to proceed with further steps invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act, also by approaching the C.J.M. by filing a petition under Section 14. The learned Counsel further submits that a sum of Rs.12,79,862/- with further interest and other charges is due from the petitioner to wipe out the liability under the loan and further that the question of regulaisation of the loan account is not possible, as there was no transaction after 2003.

¶30

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner is no more and that the petitioner might be given an opportunity to clear the entire liability by way of reasonable installments . It is also stated that the petitioner does not propose to press any of the contentions with regard to the steps taken by the Bank or to avail the alternate remedy as provided under the statute.

¶31

In the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. Five lakhs within two weeks and the balance amount shall be cleared by way of 'six ' equal monthly

¶32

¶33

W.P.(C) No. 8248 OF 2010

¶34

installments, the first of which shall be cleared on or before 10.05.2010, to be followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 10^th of the succeeding months. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in effecting the installments as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount

¶35

in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now.

¶36

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶37

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶38

Shabeer Ali v. the Manager,State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabeer Ali v. the Manager,State 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

Uco Bank, Thrissur Vs a.v.Moidunni

The Kadannamanna Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Vs the Income Tax Officer and Others

Regency Club Vs R.D.O., Thrissur

Cannanore Roller Flour Mills Pvt.Ltd. Vs the Kerala Financial Corporation & Ors.

Mohamedkunhi Vs the Canara Bank

B.Suriakumar Vs the General Manager and Others