Partly allowed

Jenin Daniel v. Catholic Syrian Bank

Kerala HC9 Mar 2016WP(C)/1432/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner defaulted on term loans and overdraft with respondent bank, triggering SARFAESI proceedings. Court, considering financial hardship, suspended further recovery upon payment of overdue amount in six monthly installments and provision of updated dues statement.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings suspended on payment of Rs. 55,18,000 plus accrued interest in six monthly installments; Respondent to furnish updated dues statement within 10 days.

Jenin Daniel Vs Catholic Syrian Bank — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/19TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 1432 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

JENIN DANIEL, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. DANIEL, VANDANATHIL HOUSE, WEST VENGOLA P.O, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVASIA

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, ZONAL OFFICE, DJM BUILDING, PB NO. 1154, MARKET RD., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, COCHIN - 682 011.

¶11

2. CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH AT SOUTH VAZHAKULOM, SOUTH VAZHAKULOM VILLAGE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 011.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Msd.

¶15

WP(C).No. 1432 of 2016 (D)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶18

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.12.2015.

¶19

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21.12.2015.

¶20

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.12.2015.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶27

W.P.(C).NO.1432 OF 2016 (D)

¶28

Dated this the 9^th day of March, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner, who had availed of an overdraft facility and two term loans 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', to recover the loan amounts. Ext.P1 is the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶31

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent bank.

¶32

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar and also taking into account

¶33

W.P.(C).No.1432/2016

¶34

¶35

the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶36

(i) The overdue amount, in respect of the overdraft facility and also the term loans availed by the petitioner, as on January, 2016, is stated to be Rs.55,18,000/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner pays the said amount of Rs.55,18,000/- together with accrued interest from January, 2016, in six equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 23.03.2016, and complies with the formalities insisted by the respondent bank for continuation of the overdraft facility, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule in the term loan account, then the further proceedings initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶37

(ii) It is further 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.

¶38

(iii) The respondent bank shall furnish the petitioner with an up-to-date statement of the dues

¶39

W.P.(C).No.1432/2016

¶40

¶41

position together with interest within ten days from today so as to enable the petitioner to discharge his liability in accordance with the directions in this judgment.

¶42

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶43

prp/9/3/16

Jenin Daniel v. Catholic Syrian Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jenin Daniel v. Catholic Syrian Bank

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

Vincent T.D Vs the Authorised Officer

Sunil Kumar T Vs Authorised Officer

Shaju Vs Kollam District Co-Operative Bank

Abdul Gafoor Vs State of Kerala

Mohankumar.S Vs H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd.

Thomas Vs the Authorised Officer, Kollam District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.