Disposed

Sreenivasan K. and Another v. the Authorised Officer and Another

Kerala HC10 Oct 2011WP(C)/5944/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, the Court granted a lenient view allowing petitioners to pay dues in six monthly installments. Further proceedings were stayed contingent upon timely payment; default would permit respondents to continue action without fresh notice.

What did the court decide?

Order directing payment of balance dues in six equal monthly installments starting 1.11.2011; further proceedings under the Act stayed pending compliance.

Sreenivasan K. and Another Vs the Authorised Officer and… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 5944 of 2011(P)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

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

¶9

1. SREENIVASAN.K., S/O. SANKARAN NAIR(LATE), AGED 50 YEARS, KURIKKILATE HOUSE, KEEZHPPAYOUR.P.O MEPPAYOUR VIA, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

2. MALLIKA.A.V., W/O. SREENIVASAN.K.,

¶11

AGED 45 YEARS, KURIKKILATE HOUSE, KEEZHPPAYOUR.P.O MEPPAYOUR VIA, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE TALUK. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H.

¶13

RESPONDENT(S):

¶14

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

¶15

1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, A.I. HOME FINANCE INDIA LTD(FORMERLY WEIZMANN HOMES LTD), NO.6/911, 1ST FLOOR, ARPEES ARCCADE, YMCA CROSS ROAD, CALICUT-673 011.

¶16

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶17

R1 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JAMES MATHEW KADAVAN

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sts

¶20

WP(C)NO.5944/2011

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

P1 COPY OF THE DETAILS REGARDING THE LOAN AMOUNT SANCTIONED TO THE PETITIONERS.

¶24

P2 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/08/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER.

¶25

P3 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21/08/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1SR PETITIONER.

¶26

P4 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14/06/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS U/S.13(2)OF THE SARFAESI ACT.

¶27

P5 COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 12/12/08 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS U/S.13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT.

¶28

P6 COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 23/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶29

P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07/02/2011 ISSUED AND AFFIXED THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER AS PER ORDER IN C.M.P.NO.171/11 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶30

P8 COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 17/02/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶31

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ==================

¶36

W.P.(C).No. 5944 of 2011

¶37

==================

¶38

Dated this the 10^th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T

¶39

The petitioners challenge proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioners. The petitioners do not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioners only seek facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments.

¶40

This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank.

¶41

However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of this writ

¶42

petition with the following directions;

¶43

The petitioners shall pay the balance amounts due in six equal monthly instalments starting from 1.11.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioners pay the instalments on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioners commit default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard.

¶44

sdk+

¶45

///True copy/// P.A. to Judge

¶46

Sreenivasan K. and Another v. the Authorised Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreenivasan K. and Another v. the Authorised Officer and Another

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

State of Kerala Vs Greeshma Prakash

K.Sidharathan Vs State of Kerala

A.v.Subramanian Vs State of Kerala and Others

K.Mukesh Vs M.Sivasankar

P.K.Muraleedharan Kartha Vs C.Thampi Paul

Sajina.P.v. Vs the Manager, Radhakrishnan