Disposed

V.R.Jayalatha v. the Union Bank

Kerala HC21 Dec 2011WP(C)/34389/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings under SARFAESI Act. The court directed the petitioner to pay a lump sum and balance in installments. If complied with, no further proceedings would be taken; default would permit resumption.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000 + balance in installments to stay proceedings; bank to keep proceedings in abeyance upon compliance.

V.R.Jayalatha Vs the Union Bank — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2011 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 34389 of 2011(W)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

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

¶9

V.R. JAYALATHA, W/O. A.P. PARAMESWARAN, ACHARYAPURAKKAL HOUSE, P.O. ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDER RAJ.

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

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

¶13

1. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, BRANCH, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 032.

¶14

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE MINISTRY, TRIVANDRUM, REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

3. SUBHASHLAL C.M, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN CMP. 3008/2011 OF CJM, ADVOCATE, CALICUT BAR ASSCN., KOZHIKODE -673 032.

¶16

R1 BY SRI. A.S.P. KURUP, S.C, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. S. JAMAL.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.P.(C).NO.34389/2011-W:

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶21

EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE TAKING POSSESSION NOTICE SERVED IN CMP.NO.3008/2011 CJM, KOZHIKODE BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.

¶22

EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION.

¶23

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Prv.

S.SIRI JAGAN

- - - - W.P.(C)NO. 34389 OF 2011

¶29

- - - - Dated this the 21^st day of December 2011

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 initiated by the first respondent for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioner to the first respondent. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to pay off the amounts in instalments. This is opposed by the counsel for the bank.

¶32

Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

¶33

The petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- within 2 weeks from today. The balance amount shall be paid in 10 equal monthly instalments starting from 01/02/2012. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the initial amount and instalments on due dates, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of either Rs.1,00,000/- or any of the subsequent instalments, it would be open to the first respondent to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard.

¶34

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶35

STU

¶36

¶37

V.R.Jayalatha v. the Union Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.R.Jayalatha v. the Union Bank

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

Celine Moses Vs the Deputy Tahsildar(Rr), Kanayannur

Yimi S.Nath Vs State of Kerala

Pavithran Vs the District Collector, Alappuzha

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Vs the Intelligence Inspector

A.Rasheed Vs Uco Bank & Another

Shaji Steels Vs Intelligence Inspector