Partly allowed

Chandradasan v. District Collector

Kerala HC1 Dec 2014WP(C)/27470/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging bank recovery proceedings due to loan default. While noting strict outstanding amounts, the court permitted the petitioners to clear the entire liability via eight monthly installments and kept coercive proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Coercive proceedings kept in abeyance; permission granted to clear entire outstanding liability via eight equal monthly instalments.

Chandradasan Vs District Collector — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 27470 of 2014 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. CHANDRADASAN, S/O. BHASKARAN NAMBIAR, THEEYENCHEI HOUSE, CHEETHAPPARA, CHANDANAKKAMPARA, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR.

¶8

2. KAMALAKSHY, W/O. BHASKARAN NAMBIAR, THEEYENCHEI HOUSE, CHEETHAPPARA, CHANDANAKKAMPARA, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR).

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR-670 002.

¶12

2. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, TALUK OFFICE, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR - 670 141.

¶13

3. BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, CHANDANAKKAMPARA BRANCH, KANNUR-670 046.

¶14

4. VILLAGE OFFICER, PAYYANNOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 048.

¶15

R1, R2 & R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.V. LONACHAN. R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.S. KALKURA, SC.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

rs.

¶18

WP(C).No. 27470 of 2014 (G)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶21

EXHIBIT-P1TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/01/2014 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶22

EXHIBIT-P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06/08/2014 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE ACT.

¶23

EXHIBIT-P3TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06/08/2014 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE ACT.

¶24

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rs.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶29

W.P(C). No. 27470 of 2014

¶30

Dated this the 1^st day of December, 2014

¶31

J U D G M E N T

¶32

The petitioners availed some 'financial assistance' from the respondent Bank of `10,00,000/- for starting a 'Poultry Farm' in October, 2011. But the repayment could not be effected on time as scheduled and the petitioners turned to be defaulters. The Bank proceeded with steps for moving the machinery under the R.R. Act, which made the petitioners to approach this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

¶33

“1. Issue a writ of certiorari and call for the records leading to Ext.P2 and P3 and quash the same and hold that the same is totally illegal.

¶34

2. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order of direction, commanding respondents, to drop the entire proceedings against the property of the petitioners forthwith and to hold that the proceedings are illegal and arbitrary or Reschedule the Loan.

¶35

3. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order of direction, commanding respondents to permit the petitioners to clear the loan amount in 15 monthly installment.

¶36

4. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order of direction, commanding respondents to grant benefit of one time settlement to the petitioners after deducting the subsidy granted by the government and

¶37

WP(c). No. 27470 of 2014

¶38

¶39

permit to clear the loan by selling a portion of land.”

¶40

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Bank as

¶41

well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2 & 4.

¶42

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 21.10.2014, the following interim order was passed;

¶43

“Learned counsel for the respondent Bank seeks for time, with regard to Exts.P2 to get instructions. Post after ten days for filing a statement.

¶44

'Status quo' shall be maintained till such time, with regard to Exts.P2 & P3 on condition that the petitioners deposit a sum of ` 2 lakhs (Two lakhs) on or before 30.10.2014.”

¶45

The petitioners have filed I.A. No.15184/2014 for

¶46

extension of time to comply with the direction, till 30.11.2014. It was accordingly, that the matter was ordered to be listed today, extending the interim order till this date. Learned counsel for the petitioners concedes that, because of unfortunate circumstances, the condition could not be satisfied and that the intending purchaser who came forward to purchase the property to turned back. It is stated that alternate arrangements are being made.

¶47

The learned counsel appearing for the Bank points out

¶48

that the petitioners have mentioned only the transaction in

¶49

WP(c). No. 27470 of 2014

¶50

¶51

connection with a loan availed in the year 2011. Another loan of 2,00,000/- was availed on 10.02.2010 in respect of which, the total 'outstanding liability' is nearly 3,18,744/- as on 01.10.2014. The total 'outstanding liability' in respect of the loan mentioned in this writ petition comes to `13,66,093/- as on 03.11.2014.

¶52

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners across the Bar, this Court finds that the respondents are justified in proceeding against the property concerned for realisation of the due amount. However, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel that other alternate arrangements are being made to identify a prospective purchaser within the shortest possible time, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioners to clear the 'entire outstanding liability' by way of 'eight' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 15^th of December, 2014, followed by similar installments, to be effected on or before the 15^th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance, for the time being. It is made clear that, if any single default is committed with regard to the satisfaction of the due amount as above, it will be open for

¶53

WP(c). No. 27470 of 2014

¶54

¶55

the respondent Bank to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in lump, by pursuing such steps from the stage where it stands now.

¶56

It is further made clear that the petitioners are free to identify a prospective purchaser of the property, upon which such person shall be taken to the doors of the Bank and the sale price if it materializes, shall be routed only through the account with the respondent Bank, to have the entire liability wiped off.

¶57

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶60

Chandradasan v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandradasan v. District Collector

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

Majeed B.A. Vs Sajeev.P.K.

Biju Issac Vs Commercial Tax Officer Ii, Angamaly

M.C.Sunil Kumar Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises

V.P.Kishore Vs Shajahan

Majeeja M.Nair Vs Dr.S.Raveendran

Johny Kurien Vs Mananthavady Grama Panchayath