Dismissed

M/S Crystal Apartments v. Bank of Baroda Kottayam

Kerala HC29 Aug 2016WP(C)/20140/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed challenging notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The Court noted possession was taken and no step was taken by the borrower. Petitioner was advised to approach the bank directly for rescheduling but no judicial interference was allowed. Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Bank for rescheduling the loan if desired.

M/S Crystal Apartments Vs Bank of Baroda… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/7TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 20140 of 2016 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.CRYSTAL APARTMENTS, CSI COMMERCIAL CENTRE, KOTTAYAM-686 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.BENNY ITTY.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1.BANK OF BARODA, KOTTAYAM BRANCH,

¶11

PB NO.171, MADEENA TOWER, BAKER JUNCTION, CMS COLLEGE ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001, REPRESENTED BY

¶12

ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

¶13

2.THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/

¶14

ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER,

¶15

BANK OF BARODA, KOTTAYAM BRANCH,

¶16

PB NO.171, MADEENA TOWER, BAKER JUNCTION, CMS COLLEGE ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686 001.

¶17

3.M/S.MIR BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., M.M.BUILDING, KALABHAVAN ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR-PLANNING

¶18

MR.JINARAJ T.V.

¶19

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.BEPIN VIJAYAN

¶20

R3 BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

mbr/

¶23

WP(C).No. 20140 of 2016 (N)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶26

P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DTD.19.12.2013 SANCTIONING LOAN TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.

¶27

P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEW DEED OF AGREEMENT DTD.21.4.2014 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DECEASED C.JACOB PHILIP.

¶28

P3 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE PETITIONER FIRM ISSUED FROM THE HOSPITAL.

¶29

P4 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE 20.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SARFAESI ACT.

¶30

P5 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD.12.1.2016 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶31

P6 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER/CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER OF FEDERAL BANK, ERNAKULAM NORTH BRANCH.

¶32

P7 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DTD.2.5.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶33

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶34

EXT.R3(A): THE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.PW7/BA/391/10-11 DATED 24.6.2016 ISSUED TO THE MANAGING PARTNERS OF THE PEITTIONER-M/S.CRYSTAL APARTMENTS BY THE MUNICIPAL SECRETARY, KOTTAYAM.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶39

W.P.(C).No.20140 of 2016

¶40

----------------------------------- Dated this the 29^th day of August, 2016

¶41

J U D G M E N T

¶42

This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P4 and P7 notices by which the Bank had initiated action against the secured asset under Section 13(2) and thereafter under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act.

¶43

It is now submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank that the total dues will come to more than 4₹ Crores and as matter stands now, no steps had been taken by the borrower to repay the amounts. It is also submitted that possession of the property has already been taken.

¶44

Taking into consideration the aforesaid factual situation, I don't think that any further direction can be issued in the present writ petition. If at all, the petitioner wants to reschedule the term loan, they are free to approach the Bank and seek necessary concession/relaxation. I don't think that this Court will be justified in interfering with the matter.

¶45

Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶48

M/S Crystal Apartments v. Bank of Baroda Kottayam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Crystal Apartments v. Bank of Baroda Kottayam

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

James Mundadan Vs Dist.Collector

Hygiene Solutions Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Fadil Samad Vs the Registrar

Smt.Dakshayani Vs the Authorized Officer

Indira Devi A.V Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Ajitha Kumari S. Vs Federal Bank Ltd.