Disposed

Hamza v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC11 Mar 2016WP(C)/232/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings, the Kerala High Court directed the bank to keep recovery steps in abeyance upon the petitioner's agreement to remit the outstanding loan amount and interest in twelve monthly installments, with conditions on default and provision of an account statement.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance conditional on payment of Rs. 5,55,000 plus interest in twelve monthly installments; bank to provide account statement.

Hamza Vs the Authorised Officer — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/21ST PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 232 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

HAMZA AGED 46 YEARS S/O. ALIPPU, KUNNATH HOUSE, PARAL THOTTA POST, PERINTHALMANNA.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.DILIP

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

THE URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, NO. 1758 MAIN BRANCH, PERINTHALMANNA.

¶11

R. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT. LILLY K.T.

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 232 of 2016 (D)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

P1TRUE COPY OF THE CRL.M.P. NO. 1650/2015 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CJM COURT, MANJERI DATED 22/06/2015.

¶17

P2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE CJM, MANJERI IN CRL.M.P. 1650/2015 DATED 30/10/2015

¶18

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-

NIL

// True copy //

PA to Judge

das

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 232 of 2016

¶25

===================================================== Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2016

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The petitioner, who had availed of a loan 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.P2 is the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶28

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

¶29

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the 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 amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I

¶30

W.P.(C). No. 232 of 2016

¶31

-2-

¶32

dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶33

(i) The total outstanding amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.5,55,000/- as on today. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.5,55,000/- together with accrued interest in twelve equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 23.03.2016, then the recovery steps initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶34

(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.

¶35

(iii) The respondent bank shall, within ten days from today, provide the petitioner with an upto-date statement of accounts so as to enable the petitioner to discharge the liability in accordance with the directions of this judgment.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶38

das /11.03.2016

Hamza v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hamza 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

Ashalatha Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

Shaji George Vs Authorised Officer

Saranya Balakrishnan Vs Manager

Dr.Soumya.P.Susheel Vs Smt.Maya.P.M

M/S.Orma Granite Centre Vs Rajan Khobragade

A T James Vs Jayachandran