Disposed

Navab Wajid v. Indian Overseas Bank

Kerala HC4 Apr 2016WP(C)/6738/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging SARFAESI Act recovery proceedings. Considering the petitioner's financial hardship, the court permitted repayment of the overdue amount in monthly installments and directed the bank to keep proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance pending payment of overdue amount Rs.2,73,429/- plus interest in 10 monthly installments starting 20.04.2016.

Navab Wajid Vs Indian Overseas Bank — 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

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2016/15TH CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 6738 of 2016 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

NAVAB WAJID, S/O.WAJID KOTTARATHIL, KOTTARATHIL HOUSE, BALANGAD, THRISSUR-680 506.

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.E.V.MOLY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, GURUVAYOOR BRANCH, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. - 680 101.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL SHANKER SMT.ARCHANA S. KUMAR

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

msv/

¶14

WP(C).No. 6738 of 2016 (N)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE SYMBOLIC POSSESSION NOTICE DT 28-1-2016 ISSUED UNDER SARFAESI ACT.

¶18

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

Msv/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ............................................................. W.P.(C).No.6738 of 2016

¶24

............................................................. Dated this the 4^th day of April, 2016

¶25

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.P1 is the possession notice. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶26

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent bank.

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(C). No.6738 of 2016

¶29

-2-

¶30

amounts outstanding to the respondent 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:-

¶31

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan availed by the petitioner as on 22.02.2016 is stated to be Rs.2,73,429/-. Accordingly, if the petitioner pays the said amount of Rs.2,73,429/- together with accrued interest and other charges in 10 equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 20.04.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule, then the further proceedings initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶32

(ii) It is further 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.

¶33

(iii) The respondent bank shall, within ten days

¶34

-3-

¶35

W.P.(C). No.6738 of 2016

¶36

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 in this judgment.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶39

mns/4.4.16

Navab Wajid v. Indian Overseas Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navab Wajid v. Indian Overseas Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C. Yousaph, Proprietor, Nanminda Wood Industries Vs State of Kerala

V.D.Joseph Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sreedevi Amma Vs Authorised Officer

Omana Vs Union Bank of India

Swaraj K.K. Vs Aluva Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd, Rep.by Its Authorized Officer

Baiju S.R. Vs Central Bank of India