Partly allowed

Kunjayammu T.T. v. Authorised Officer

Kerala HC27 Oct 2016WP(C)/34515/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this housing loan recovery case, the Kerala High Court took a benevolent view of a defaulter willing to repay dues in installments. It directed the bank to allow four-month installment payments and deferred possession of the asset by the Advocate Commissioner, with terms that default would reinstate possession rights.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to pay overdue amount with interest in four equal monthly instalments; possession deferred conditional on payment.

Kunjayammu T.T. Vs Authorised Officer — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/5TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 34515 of 2016 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KUNJAYAMMU T.T., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. KUNHALAN HAJI, THOTTUNGALATHODI HOUSE, CHETHALLOOR P.O., MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.MANSOOR.B.H., SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

AUTHORISED OFFICER, SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, SUNDARAM TOWERS, 46, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600 014.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE.

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

rs.

¶14

WP(C).No. 34515 of 2016 (L)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶17

EXT.P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08/03/2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶18

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE MEMO IN CMP. NO.5887/2015 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD.

¶19

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J

*** * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.C.No.34515 of 2016

¶25

Dated this the 27^th day of October 2016

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Petitioner has approached this Court at a stage when the secured asset has already been taken possession by the respondent Bank invoking Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

¶28

Petitioner had availed a housing loan for Rs.19 lakhs from the respondent Bank. The petitioner could not repay the monthly instalments in time on account of certain financial difficulties. In the meantime, proceedings had been taken by the respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the overdue amount in instalments and will also pay the regular instalments, if some time is granted.

¶30

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner had expressed the willingness to repay the overdue amount in instalments, I am of the view that some indulgence can be shown to the petitioner.

¶31

W.P.C.No.34515/2016

¶32

¶33

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under:

¶34

(i) The petitioner shall pay the overdue amount with accrued interest in four equal monthly instalments starting from 25/11/2016.

¶35

(ii) If the amounts are paid, as aforesaid, the Advocate Commissioner shall defer taking possession of the premises.

¶36

(iii) If there is any default in payment of any of the aforesaid amounts, the Advocate Commissioner shall be entitled to take possession of the premises without notice to the petitioner and the Bank shall be entitled to take further proceedings, in accordance with law.

¶37

(sd/-)

¶38

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶39

jsr

Kunjayammu T.T. v. Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunjayammu T.T. v. 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

Sachin Saji Vs Vice Chancellor, Kerala University of Health Science

The Assistant Executive Engineer Vs Narayanan K

K.Ramabhadran Vs State of Kerala

A.M.John Vs the Branch Manager

Dolly John Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Dot Peripherals India (P) Ltd. Vs Asst. Commissioner (Appeals)