Allowed

Rajesh K v. the Authorized Officer, Sindicate Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC23 Feb 2016WP(C)/4623/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerns recovery proceedings initiated by Syndicate Bank under the SARFAESI Act against the petitioner for a loan default. The court allowed the petitioner to remit the overdue principal in eight monthly installments to keep recovery steps in abeyance, warning that default will resume proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance if petitioner pays Rs. 1,13,121/ plus accrued interest in eight equal monthly installments commencing 03.03.2016, adhering to original loan schedule; default resu

Rajesh K Vs the Authorized Officer, Sindicate Bank Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | 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 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/4TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 4623 of 2016 (C)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

RAJESH K, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.SANKARAN, KEENERI HOUSE, ELAMBACHI PO, KASARGOD DISTRICT-671 311.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.V.G.ARUN

¶9

SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR-670 001.

¶12

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK LTD., TRIKKARIPUR BRANCH, KASARAGOD-671 311.

¶13

BY SRI.R.S. KALKURA, SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C).No. 4623 of 2016 (C)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

P1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED FROM THE KMC HOSPITAL, MANIPAL DT 22-4-2006.

¶20

P2 : A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REGIONAL MANAGER, DT 9-1-2015.

¶21

P3 : A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT 9-1-2015.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶28

W.P.(C). No. 4623 of 2016

¶29

===================================================== Dated this the 23^rd day of February, 2016

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

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. It is stated that the respondent bank has published a possession notice in respect of the secured asset.

¶32

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

¶33

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 dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶34

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan,

¶35

-2-

¶36

W.P.(C). No. 4623 of 2016

¶37

is stated to be Rs.1,13,121/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,13,121/- together with accrued interest in eight equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 03.03.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installments as per the original loan schedule, then the recovery steps initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶38

(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.

¶39

(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.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

das /23.02.2016

Rajesh K v. the Authorized Officer, Sindicate Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh K v. the Authorized Officer, Sindicate 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

M/S. Kasmisons Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax Division

Rojer P. Mathew Vs the Authorised Officer, South Indian Bank Limited

Madhuri Vs Authorized Officer

Saidali Vs the Manager

M/S. Surya Catering Service Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Sini Biju Vs State of Kerala