Partly allowed

Ibrahim Kutty K.T. v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC18 Dec 2015WP(C)/36306/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act initiated by a housing finance company due to loan default. The court considered the petitioner's plea of financial hardship and permitted remittance of the total overdue amount in equal monthly installments to stay recovery steps, subject to continued compliance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to remit overdue amount in equal monthly installments; recovery proceedings stayed subject to compliance.

Ibrahim Kutty K.T. Vs the Authorised Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 36306 of 2015 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

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

¶8

IBRAHIM KUTTY K.T., AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. HAMZA, RESIDING AT KURUPPANTHODIYIL HOUSE, KIZHAYOOR POST, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT679 303.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.ABDUL HAKEEM

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

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

¶12

1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, M/S. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SUNDARAM HOME FINANCE LIMITED) SUNDARAM HOUSE, 46, WHITES ROAD,CHENNAI -600014.

¶13

2. M/S. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SUNDARAM HOME FINANCE LIMITED) BRANCH OFFICE, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM - 676 121 REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶14

BY SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 36306 of 2015 (K)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF THE CMP NO.4500/2015 PENDING BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶26

¶27

W.P.(C) No.36306 of 2015

¶28

- - - - Dated this the 18^th day of December 2015

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The petitioner, who along with his wife, son and daughter-inlaw had availed a housing loan from the respondent company, defaulted in repayment of the same. Consequently, the respondent company initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act', to recover the loan amounts. Ext.P1 is the copy of the application filed before the Magistrate, under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent company for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶31

I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶32

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the

¶33

case and the submissions made across the bar, I note that the sole prayer of the petitioner is to permit him to remit the balance

¶34

W.P.(c).No.36306 of 2015

¶35

: 2 :

¶36

amounts outstanding to the company in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶37

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.4,62,979/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.4,62,979/- together with accrued interest in ten equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 05.01.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule, then the recovery steps initiated against him by the respondent company 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 company will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against him from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶39

(iii)The respondent company shall furnish the petitioner with an up-to-date statement of the dues position, within 10 days from today, so as to enable the petitioner to effect repayment as per the directions in this judgment.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

sm/

Ibrahim Kutty K.T. v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibrahim Kutty K.T. 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

Sivanandan Keloth Vs the Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Abhilash. N Vs the Authorised Officer

S.Ashik Hameed Vs the Branch Manager, State Bank of Travancore

Joby a George Vs Authorised Officer

Koshy Varghese Vs the District Collector

Autogas Energy India Ltd. Vs Regional Transport Officer