Allowed

Pradeep Kumar.B v. State Bank of Travancore

Kerala HC27 Sept 2016WA/1884/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of this writ appeal challenging a judgment that granted time to repay a bank loan. The Court refused further extension but granted the appellant time to clear the entire loan amount before the scheduled property sale proceeds with the sale. The Court clarified no further leniency would be shown. No specific relief was granted beyond extending time.

What the court decided

AI extract

Pradeep Kumar.B Vs State Bank of Travancore — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/5TH ASWINA, 1938

¶7

WA.No. 1884 of 2016 () IN WP(C).19575/2016

¶8

¶9

APPELLANT/WRIT PETITIONER:

¶10

PRADEEP KUMAR.B S/O BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, THEVALAPPURATHU HOUSE, CHETTUKULANGARA PO, MAVELIKKARA

¶11

BY ADV. SMT.E.V.MOLY

¶12

RESPONDENT:

¶13

STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE REGION FOR PADMA BHAVAN BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, KSRTC BUS STAND, MAVELIKKARA-690109, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC, SBT

¶15

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, C.J. &

¶17

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶18

W.A. No.1884 of 2016

¶19

Dated this the 27^th day of September, 2016

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, C.J.

¶22

aW.P.(C) No.19575 of 2016 is disposed of by the

¶23

learned single Judge in the following terms:

¶24

“Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, this writ petition is disposed of as under:

¶25

1.The petitioner shall pay an amount of ₹10 lakhs on or before 20.07.2016 and the balance amount with accrued interest on or before 30.08.2016.

¶26

2.The Bank is permitted to proceed with the sale of property. However, the confirmation of sale shall be deferred and the purchaser, if any, shall be informed about the proceedings pending before this Court.

¶27

3.If the amount as stated above is not paid, the Bank shall be entitled to proceed with confirmation of sale and take further steps in accordance with law.”

¶28

W.A. No.1884 of 2016

¶29

-2-

¶30

The records reveal that the writ petitioner/appellant

¶31

herein received certain loans from the respondent Bank which remain unpaid. Consequently, the Bank initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The sale was proclaimed and when it was about to be held on 09.06.2016, W.P.(C) No.19575 of 2016 was filed a day prior thereto, i.e. 08.06.2016.

¶32

After hearing the learned counsel for the Bank, the

¶33

impugned judgment is passed by the learned singe Judge taking a lenient view in the matter, granting three months' time to the appellant to pay the dues.

¶34

Despite such leniency shown by the court in W.P. (C) No.19575 of 2016, the appellant who is the beneficiary of the impugned judgment has not obeyed the directions therein. By filing this appeal, the appellant seeks further leniency.

¶35

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that if

¶36

W.A. No.1884 of 2016

¶37

-3-

¶38

some more time is accorded to the appellant to repay the entire loan amount, he could make arrangements to clear the entire loan. The said submission is opposed by the learned counsel for the Bank.

¶39

Since ample leniency has been shown by the learned single Judge in favour of the appellant, no further leniency need be shown in this appeal. However, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances and as the sale is about to take place, we deem it proper to grant breathing time to the appellant to clear the entire loan amount. The appellant is therefore, directed to clear the entire loan amount on or before the 31^st day of October, 2016. It is made clear that no further leniency will be shown to the appellant by extending the time any further. It is open for the appellant to repay the entire loan amount and clear the dues within the aforementioned period in order to save his property.

¶40

-4-

¶41

W.A. No.1884 of 2016

¶42

The writ appeal is disposed of as above.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR CHIEF JUSTICE

¶45

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE

¶46

kns/-

¶47

//TRUE COPY//

¶48

P.S. TO JUDGE

Pradeep Kumar.B v. State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Pradeep Kumar.B v. State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santhanapara Grama Panchayath Vs K.P.Philip

M/S Walayar Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Chief General Manager

Roshan Jacob Oommen Vs State of Kerala

A.Balakrishnan Vs the Managing Director

R.Jayanth Vs K.Subair Khan