Partly allowed

Aji Joseph v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC8 Apr 2015WP(C)/2017/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner defaulted in a cash credit facility and faced recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The court allowed remittance of the outstanding amount in twelve monthly installments on condition of payment from April 30, 2015, keeping recovery steps in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Recovery steps kept in abeyance if petitioner pays Rs.25,00,000 plus interest in twelve monthly installments from 30.04.2015.

Aji Joseph Vs the Authorised Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/18TH CHAITHRA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).NO. 2017 OF 2015 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

AJI JOSEPH, AGED 41 YEARS S/O.JOSEPH, KANAKAMCHERRY, KULATHUVAYAL KAYANNA P.O., PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE - 673 526.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, TAMILNADU MERCANTILE BANK LIMITED, REGIONAL OFFICE FIRST FLOOR, KURAISHA PLAZA, T.C.54/2, 4, 5, 6 & 7 PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 018.

¶11

BY SRI.K.S.DILIP, SC BY ADVS. SRI.SAJU N.A.

¶12

SMT.G.LEKHA SMT.P.J.FLONY

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

WP(C).NO. 2017 OF 2015 (B)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶18

EXT. P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF NALLALAM POLICE STATION DATED 30/5/2014.

¶19

EXT. P2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PUBLICATION OF 13(2) NOTICE DATED 20/12/2014.

¶20

EXT. P3: COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE PETITIONER'S OBJECTION DATED 26/12/2014.

¶21

EXT. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE FIRM OF THE PETITIONER DATED 21/7/2014.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶27

.................................................

¶28

W.P.(C) No.2017 of 2015 (B)

¶29

............................................... Dated this the 8^th day of April, 2015

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioner, who had availed of a Cash Credit facility from the respondent Bank, defaulted in repayment of the same. Consequently, the respondent bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI Act’, against the petitioner. Ext.P2 is the notice issued under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act to the petitioner in that regard. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶32

I have heard Sri.Sudhissh R., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.S.Dileep, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶33

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made across the Bar, I note that the sole prayer of the petitioner is to permit him to remit the total amount outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following

¶34

W.P.(C) No.2017 of 2015 (B)

¶35

¶36

directions:

¶37

i. The total amount outstanding from the petitioner to the respondent Bank is stated to be Rs.25,00,000/together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner pays the said amount of Rs.25,00,000/together with accrued interest, in twelve equal and successive monthly instalments commencing from 30.04.2015, then, the recovery steps initiated against the petitioner for recovery of the amounts outstanding to the Bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶38

ii. It is made clear that, if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, he will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against him from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶39

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶40

AMV/08/04/

Aji Joseph v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aji Joseph 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.T.Mathai Vs the South Indian Bank Ltd.

Range Enterprises Ltd. Vs Intelligance Officer

Shaindas Vs Special Deputy Tahsildar

Indian Overseas Bank Vs T.K. Kumaran

Shajan C a Vs Kerala Gramin Bank ,Rep by Its Authorized Officer

Joseph M.J. Vs the Irinjalakuda Town Co-Operative Bank