Allowed

Karthiyani T.K v. Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Kerala HC15 Oct 2012OP (DRT)/1403/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, who defaulted on a bank loan, filed an opinion petition to revive a stay order due to partial compliance. The court directed payment of outstanding EMI and deficiencies within two months, promising reinstatement of the stay upon satisfaction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay EMI for Aug/Sept 2012 and shortfall from July 2012 within two months; stay order to be reinstated upon compliance.

Karthiyani T.K Vs Authorised Officer, State Bank of… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/23RD ASWINA 1934

¶5

OP (DRT).No. 1403 of 2012 (O)

¶6

SA.669/2011 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

KARTHIYANI T.K

¶9

W/O.K.M.GOPALAN, KARNAMKOTTU HOUSE, THOZHIYUR P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680520.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.VANAJA MADHAVAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE KUNNAMKULAM BRANCH, TRICHUR DISTRICT, PIN-680503.

¶13

R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR

¶14

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

OP(DRT) NO.1403/12

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1: PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER DT.1-11-2011 IN IA 2516/11 IN SA 669/11 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.

¶19

EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF SALE NOTICE DT.23-3-2012.

¶20

EXT.P3: SERIES PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.28-3-11 FOR RS.75,000/EXT.P3(1): PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.30-3-11 FOR RS.45,000/EXT.P3(2): PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.26-6-11 FOR RS.5,000/EXT.P3(3): PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.16-12-2011. EXT.P3(4): PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.16-1-2012 FOR RS.50,000/EXT.P3(5): PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT DT.29-2-2012 FOR RS.25,000/-

¶21

EXT.P4: PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPTS OF PAYMENT OF MONEY IN A/C.67102397968 WITH STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE.

//True Copy//

PA to Judge

ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ O.P.(DRT) NO. 1403 OF 2012

¶26

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

¶27

Dated this the 15^th day of October, 2012

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Petitioner had availed of a loan of 15,00,000/- from the respondent Bank. Default was committed and SARFAESI proceedings were initiated. Thereupon the petitioner filed SA 669/11 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. In that application, the Tribunal passed Ext.P1 interim order of stay subject to the condition that the petitioner shall remit 50,000/each on 16/12/11 and 16/1/2012. It was also ordered that the petitioner shall continue to pay the EMI. Although the two instalments of `50,000/- each were paid, petitioner did not continue to pay the EMI as directed by the Tribunal and therefore the Bank revived the SARFAESI proceedings and issued Ext.P2 sale notice. It was at that stage petitioner filed this OP(DRT).

¶30

It is now submitted that towards the EMI payable, petitioner paid only 25,000/- upto July 2012 and that no payments were made for August and September, 2012. Since the EMI payable is 34,322/-, the payments made by the petitioner do not satisfy the monthly instalments prescribed.

¶31

OP(DRT).No.1403/12

¶32

:2 :

¶33

Obviously therefore, default has been committed by the petitioner and in that sense, recovery action initiated cannot be said to be faulty. However, fact remains that the petitioner has substantially complied with the order passed by the Tribunal and therefore if the petitioner pay the difference between the amount paid towards the EMI and the EMI prescribed by the Bank for the period upto July 2012 and also pay the EMI payable for August and September 2012 and continue to pay the same, there is no reason why the petitioner shall not be given the benefit of Ext.P1 order passed by the Tribunal.

¶34

Therefore, I dispose of this OP(DRT) with the following directions;

¶35

(1) That the petitioner shall pay the EMI payable for August and September and shall continue to pay the EMI as directed in Ext.P1 order of the Tribunal.

¶36

(2) In addition to that, within two months from today, the petitioner shall also pay the difference between the amount paid and the EMI payable for the period upto July 2012.

¶37

(3) If payments are made as above, petitioner will be

¶38

OP(DRT).No.1403/12

¶39

:3 :

¶40

entitled to stay as ordered by the Tribunal in Ext.P1 order and the Tribunal shall expeditiously dispose of SA 669/11.

¶41

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶42

Karthiyani T.K v. Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthiyani T.K v. Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

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

M/S. Das Associates (Hotel Dass Continental) Vs Shoeb Samad

Ganesh Babu E.K. Vs I.C.I.C.I Bank and Others

Gopinathan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Eramala Grama Panchayath Vs K.K. Asharaf

C.R.Reghunathan Vs K.S.F.E.

Jose T. Vs the Deputy Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery)