Allowed

Prasanth v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC21 Mar 2014WP(C)/2596/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition challenging coercive proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Finding the default not to be wilful, the Court granted the petitioners a limited opportunity to clear defaulted installments via equal monthly installments, keeping recovery proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to clear defaulted arrears in three equal monthly installments; revenue recovery proceedings placed in abeyance subject to compliance.

Prasanth Vs the Authorised Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2014/30TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 2596 of 2014 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

1. PRASANTH C., S/O. CHELLAPPAN, AGED 35, 17/855 SREEKOVIL ANU'S VILLA, ARYANADU, ATHIPOZHI ROAD MUNDAMVELI P.O., KOCHI.

¶8

2. SINCY PRASANTH

¶9

W/O. PRASANTH, 17/855, SREEKOVIL ANU'S VILLA, ARYANADU, ATHIPOZHI ROAD MUNDAMVELI P.O., KOCHI.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI. T. RAJESH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶12

1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER FEDERAL BANK LTD., STRESSED ASSET MANAGEMENT CELL FEDERAL TOWER, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

2. FEDERAL BANK,

¶14

PALLURUTHY BRANCH, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER FEDERAL BANK, PALLURUTHY-682006.

¶15

BY ADVS. SRI.A.ANTONY

¶16

SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

...2/-

¶20

WP(C).No. 2596 of 2014 (Y)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶23

EXT. P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS HOUSING LOAN ACCOUNT OF THE 1ST PETITIONER FROM 11-9-2009 TILL 22-1-2014.

¶24

EXT. P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE CAR LOAN ACCOUNT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER FROM 11-9-2009 TILL 22-1-2014.

¶25

EXT. P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PURPORTEDLY UNDER RULE 8 OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT 2002.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶31

W.P.(C)No.2596 OF 2014

¶32

Dated this the 21^st March, 2014

¶33

J U D G M E N T

¶34

The petitioners, who are husband and wife are before this

¶35

Court challenging the coercive proceedings taken by the respondent Bank invoking the remedy under the SARFAESI Act for realisation of the due amount under a loan transaction. It is stated that the default occurred was not because of any wilful laches or deliberate negligence, but because of some unforeseen circumstances. It is stated that they do not intend to dispute the liability nor do they intend to avail the statutory remedy by approaching the DRT. The prayer is only to grant some breathing

¶36

time to clear the entire defaulted arrears, so as to have the loan account regularised.

¶37

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the petitioners are wilful defaulters in so far as the overdue amount in respect of the above two loans is nearly Rs. 12.9 lakhs and that unless the overdue amount is cleared forthwith, the claim for regularisation is not liable to be entertained.

¶38

After hearing both the sides and also considering the particular facts and circumstances, this Court finds it fit and

¶39

¶40

W.P.(C)No.2596 OF 2014

¶41

proper to give one more opportunity to the petitioners to save their property. In the said circumstances, the petitioners are directed to clear the overdue amount in respect of defaulted installments by way of 'three' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 15.04.2014, followed by similar two more installments to be effected on or before the 15^th of the succeeding months. This will be in addition to the liability of the petitioners to remit the regular monthly installments as well. Subject to the above, the revenue recovery proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioners in remitting any of the three installments towards the defaulted E.M.Is as above or if any two consecutive defaults are made in respect of the regular E.M.Is, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with coercive steps from the stage where it stands now for realisation of the amount in a lump

¶42

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶43

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶44

Prasanth v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanth v. the Authorised Officer

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

Afsal.K.H Vs the South Indian Bank Ltd.

Vilakkudy Grama Panchayat Vs M.Geevarghese

Vimal Chittilappally Vs the Regional Transport Officer

M/S Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala

T.B Swamidasan Vs Kerala Water Authority

Ajumma Vs Chief Manager, Federal Bank