The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking regularization of a defaulted housing loan against SARFAESI proceedings. The court refused regularization due to the petitioner's breach of an interim order by forcefully repossessing the property and instead directed payment of the balance in six installments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/20TH ASWINA 1934
WP(C).No. 8329 of 2011 (M) -------------------------CMP.926/2011 of C.J.M., ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONER(S):
GANESH BABU.E.K, EREEPACKAL VEEDU, SOUTH MANKUZHI,MAVELIKKARA, NEAR BHARANIKAVU, PULLIKANACKU, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, ICICI BANK LTD., GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD 5000032.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD., ABAN ARCADE,T.K.ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA 689 645.
R1 & R2 BY ADVS.SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.P.A.ABISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DG
WP(C).No. 8329 of 2011 (M)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
| EXT.P1: COPY |
OF | THE 13(2) NOTICE | ISSUED ON 11.09.2010. |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXT.P2: COPY |
OF | THE RECEIPTS (SER | IES 6 NOS). |
| EXT.P3: COPY 09.03 |
OF .20 |
THE LETTER ISSUED 11. |
BY THE COMMISSIONER DATED |
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
DG
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.8329 OF 2011(M)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of October, 2012
J U D G M E N T
A housing loan of Rs.8 lakhs was availed of by the petitioner in December, 2005. Default was committed and SARFAESI proceedings were initiated by the respondents. It was at that stage the writ petition was filed pleading that the Bank was about to take over possession of the property and that the petitioner wanted to get the loan regularised.
WPC.No. 8329/2011
:2 :
interim order from this court, the petitioner broke open the lock and forcefully re-possessed the property. In spite of it, Bank is still willing to maintain the present position provided the petitioner pays the amount due in installments.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
vi/
WPC.No. 8329/2011
:3 :
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition can be allowed for regularization of the housing loan given the petitioner's conduct of repossessing the property after an interim order?
Whether the writ petition can be allowed for directing regularization of the housing loan?
GANESH BABU.E.K
ICICI BANK LTD.
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
