Allowed

P.V. Sidheek v. Chief Manager

Kerala HC3 Oct 2013WP(C)/23527/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner to repay the dues under a non-performing cash credit facility in ten equal monthly instalments and the term loan dues in four equal monthly instalments, staying coercive recovery steps if conditions are met.

What did the court decide?

Permission to repay cash credit dues in ten equal monthly instalments and term loan overdue in four equal monthly instalments, with coercive steps stayed on compliance.

P.V. Sidheek Vs Chief Manager — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/11TH ASWINA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 23527 of 2013 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

P.V. SIDHEEK, S/O P.M VEERAVU, PATTARUMADOM HOUSE, KANDANTHARA, ALLAPARA P.O, PERUMBAVOOR

¶8

BY ADV. SRIP.S.SUJETH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE CHIEF MANAGER,

¶11

THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.

¶12

PERUMBAVOOR BRANCH -683542

¶13

2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.

¶14

PERUMBABOOR BRANCH, P.B NO.6, FEDERAL CHAMBERS,

¶15

PERUMBAVOOR-683542

¶16

R BY SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY-SC FOR FEDERAL BANK

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-102013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).No. 23527 of 2013 (M)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS

¶21

EXT.P1	COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27-5-2013 OF THE RESPONDENT BANK
EXT.P2	COPY OF THE 13(2) NOTICE DATED 18-7-2013 OF THE RESPONDENT BANK
EXT.P3	COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 7-9-2013 SUBMITTED WITH THE BANK
EXT.P4	COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7-9-2013 LETTER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT BANK

¶22

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

SMM

V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

¶27

= = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.23527 of 2013 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =

¶28

Dated this the 3^rd day of October, 2013

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner has availed a cash credit facility as well as a term loan from the first respondent bank. The amount due under the cash credit facility comes to about 35,61,165/-(Rupees₹ thirty five lakhs sixty one thousand one hundred and sixty five only) and is already declared as a non performing asset. The same cannot be regularised and the petitioner can aspire for an instalment facility only for repayment.

¶31

I permit the petitioner to pay the amount due under the cash credit facility in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 1-11-2013. The coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P2 and P4 notices shall be put on hold if the petitioner complies with the conditions in time. The coercive steps shall surge ahead if the petitioner commits default in the payment of anyone of the instalments as directed.

¶32

The amount due under the term loan comes to about ₹ 12,01,930/-(Rupees twelve lakhs one thousand nine hundred and thirty only) which of course can be regularised. The overdue amount comes to about 4,50,000/- (Rupees four lakhs fifty₹

¶33

W.P.(C) No.23527 of 2013 2

¶34

thousand only) which shall be paid in four equal monthly instalments starting from 1-11-2013. This will be in addition to the equated monthly instalments which the petitioner is otherwise obliged to pay. The coercive steps shall be put on hold if the petitioner complies with the conditions and the coercive proceedings shall continue if the petitioner commits default.

¶35

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶36

V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶37

smm

P.V. Sidheek v. Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.V. Sidheek v. Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Pushpangathan Vs State of Kerala

Mariamma Xavier Vs Mathew

T.L. Gopakumar Vs the Tahsildar

M/S.Solar Industries Vs the Addl. Commissioner

M.Ashraf Ali Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Jose Mathew Vs State Bank of India