Disposed

Supriya Bhai v. the Kottayam District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC31 Oct 2014WP(C)/27797/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted stay on recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act against petitioners defaulting on a cash-credit loan, directing them to clear overdue dues in four monthly instalments to regularize the account.

What did the court decide?

Stayed recovery proceedings; directed recovery of overdue amount in four equal monthly instalments starting 15 November 2014.

Supriya Bhai Vs the Kottayam District Co-Op… — 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

FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/9TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 27797 of 2014 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. SUPRIYA BHAI ARUN NIVAS, KUMARAKOM P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686 563.

¶8

2. ARUN CHANDRAN

¶9

ARUN NIVAS, KUMARAKOM P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686 563.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD HEAD OFFICE, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER SABU SEBASTIAN – 686 001

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC,SC,DIST.CO-OP,BANK,KTM

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 27797 of 2014 (Y)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT-P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 09/10/2014 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTTAYAM IN C.M.P.NO. 2192/2014.

¶19

EXHIBIT-P2: COPY OF THE C.M.P NO. 2192/2014 PENDING BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTTAYAM.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: N I L

¶21

---------------------------------------

// TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶26

-------------------------------------------------W.P.(C).No.27797 of 2014

¶27

Dated this the 31^st day of October, 2014.

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioners availed a cash-credit loan of `1.73 lakhs from the respondent Bank. Since the repayment could not be effected as scheduled, the Bank proceeded with steps under the SARFAESI Act, which made the petitioners to approach this Court by filing this writ petition.

¶30

The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the loan has been taken by the 2^nd petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits on instructions that, the total outstanding amount is nearly 2,50,094/- (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand ninety four only). It is also pointed out that the overdue amount in respect of default instalments itself is 1,36,690/- .

¶31

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the default was never willful, but because of some unforeseen circumstances and that the petitioners are ready to clear the entire overdue amount in respect of the cash-credit loan by way of reasonable monthly instalments. It is also stated that the petitioners do not intend to dispute the liability of the petitioner

¶32

¶33

W.P.C.No. 27797OF 2014

¶34

or the rights of the Bank to proceed with further steps under SARFAESI Act. The prayer is only to grant some reasonable instalments.

¶35

After hearing both the sides, the petitioners are directed to satisfy the 'overdue' amount in respect of defaulted instalments, by way of 'four' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 15^th of November, 2014, followed by similar instalments, to be effected on or before the 15^th of the succeeding months. This shall be in addition to the liability of the petitioners to clear the regular EMIs. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance, for the time being and the loan account will stand regularized. It is made clear that, if any single default is committed with regard to the satisfaction of the 'overdue' as above, or if any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular monthly instalments, it will be open to 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.

¶36

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶37

SD/-

¶38

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶39

Supriya Bhai v. the Kottayam District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Supriya Bhai v. the Kottayam District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

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

Mary Jose Vs Rama Raja Prema Prasad

Giby Thomas Vs Executive Engineer

Tomy O.A Vs Authorised Officer

Omanakuttan Pillai Vs the Joint Rto

M.A Kareem Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

P.A George Xavier Vs State of Kerala