Partly allowed

Peter M.O v. Sundaram Bnp Paribhas Home Finance Ltd.

Kerala HC22 Jun 2015WP(C)/16111/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala suspended ongoing SARFAESI proceedings by passing conditional directions, directing the petitioner to deposit an interim sum and discharge the overdue amount in seven monthly instalments within a stipulated timeframe, with liberty to the institution to proceed upon default.

What did the court decide?

Order to deposit ₹1,00,000/- and clear overdue amount plus EMI in seven monthly instalments upon default of which institution can proceed.

Peter M.O Vs Sundaram Bnp Paribhas Home… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2015/1ST ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 16111 of 2015 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PETER M.O, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, MAVELI HOUSE, AYATHUPADI, KOOVAPPADI P O, PERUMBAVOOR, KOCHI 683544.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBHAS HOME FINANCE LTD. SUNDARAM TOWERS, 4TH FLOOR, NO 46, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI 600014, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.

¶11

2. MANAGER,

¶12

SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS LTD, 2ND FLOOR, ELIZABETH ALEXANDER MEMORIAL BUILDING, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682031.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C).No. 16111 of 2015 (L)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

P1:A TRUE COPY OF THE SECTION 13(2)NOTICE DTD 1/3/2015 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT

¶20

P2:A TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DTD 19/5/2015

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶27

W.P(C). No. 16111 of 2015

¶28

Dated this the 22^nd day of June, 2015

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner availed loan from the respondent financial institution. On account of non-repayment of the amount, the institution has initiated SARFAESI proceedings.

¶31

According to the institution, the overdue amount is 6,58,000/- and the total liability as on date is around 13,00,000/-. It is admitted that the period of loan is not over.

¶32

Taking into the facts and circumstances, the following directions are issued:

¶33

(i) The petitioner shall deposit `1,00,000/- on or before 15.07.2015.

¶34

(ii) Thereafter the petitioner shall discharge the entire overdue amount along with regular EMI in seven monthly instalments starting from 15.08.2015.

¶35

(iii) If the petitioner fails to pay any one of the instalment as above, the institution is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner.

¶36

(iv) If the petitioner clears the amount as above, the account shall be regularised.

¶37

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.

¶40

Peter M.O v. Sundaram Bnp Paribhas Home Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peter M.O v. Sundaram Bnp Paribhas Home Finance 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

Indua Towers Ltd. Vs M.G.Rajamanickam

Lakshmikutty Vs Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.

M/S.Kerala Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Nelson P.Abraham Vs the Principal, St.Thomas College

Shiyas P.M. Vs the Authorised Officer, Trichur Urban Co-Operative Bank

Sarojini Vs the Authorized Officer/Chief Manager, Federal Bank Ltd.