Allowed

Saritha K.L. v. Authorised Officer, Trivandrum District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC9 Feb 2016WP(C)/2518/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging steps under the SARFAESI Act for loan recovery, the Court directed an installment payment plan of Rs.4,18,000 plus interest over eight months, halting enforcement if the petitioner complies, while requiring a fresh duty statement from the bank.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance upon repayment of Rs.4,18,000 plus accrued interest in eight equal monthly installments starting from 24.02.2016.

Saritha K.L. Vs Authorised Officer… — 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

TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/20TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 2518 of 2016 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

SARITHA K.L., AGED 30 YEARS, W/O.ANILKUMAR, V.N.K. MANDIRAM, KIDAYARAKONAM, VENPAKAL P.O., TRIVANDRUM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.R.SASITH SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶9

RESPONDENT :

¶10

AUTHORIZED OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK HEAD OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM-695 001.

¶11

BY SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. CO. BANK

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

sts

¶14

WP(C).No. 2518 of 2016 (L)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK TO PETITIONER 21.2.15.

¶18

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶24

¶25

W.P.(C) No.2518 of 2016

¶26

- - - - Dated this the 9^th day of February 2016

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

The petitioner, who had availed 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.P1 is the possession notice issued to the petitioner under the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶29

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

¶30

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 her to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into

¶31

W.P.(c).No.2518 of 2016

¶32

: 2 :

¶33

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

¶34

(i) The total outstanding amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.4,18,000/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.4,18,000/- together with accrued interest in eight equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 24.02.2016, then the recovery steps initiated against her by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶35

(ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against her from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶36

(iii)The respondent bank 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.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶39

sm/

Saritha K.L. v. Authorised Officer, Trivandrum District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saritha K.L. v. Authorised Officer, Trivandrum District Co-Op. Bank Ltd.

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

Anil Kumar Vs Authorised Officer

Abu P.A Vs the Authorized Officer

M/S Offshore Infra Structures Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala

Century Shipyard Pvt.Ltd Vs Ait & Commercial Tax Officer

M/S. Zeens Food Processing India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.Bhima Jewellery Vs the Intelligence Inspector