Partly allowed

Balakrishna R. v. the Kerala Gramin Bank

Kerala HC19 Jan 2016WP(C)/712/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging SARFAESI Act recovery steps due to default, the High Court allowed the petitioner to remit the overdue amount in equal monthly installments. Upon compliance, the bank's recovery proceedings shall remain in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance upon remission of Rs.3,36,300 plus interest in six equal monthly installments commencing 05.02.2016; bank to provide updated account statement within 10 days.

Balakrishna R. Vs the Kerala Gramin 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

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/29TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 712 of 2016 (L)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

BALAKRISHNA R., AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. RAMA PATALI, BALLIMOGERU HOUS, KODLU VILLAGE, KODLU P.O, KASARGOD, PIN - 671 124.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN

¶9

SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SRI.SABU GEORGE SRI.S.NITHIN (ANCHAL)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

--------------------------

¶12

1. THE KERALA GRAMIN BANK, MOGRALPUTHUR BRANCH, KASARGOD, PIN - 671 124, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶13

2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, KERALA GRAMIN BANK, (CHIEF MANAGER), REGIONAL OFFICE, TIGER HILLS, MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, KASARGOD - 671 121.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.K.M.ANEESH, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

msv/

¶17

WP(C).No. 712 of 2016 (L)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BID CUM AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 3-12-2015 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2

¶21

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 19-12-2015

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

Ms v/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶28

W.P.(C). No. 712 of 2016

¶29

===================================================== Dated this the 19^th day of January, 2016

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

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 auction/sale 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.

¶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

-2-

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 712 of 2016

¶36

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.3,36,300/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,36,300/- together with accrued interest in six equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 05.02.2016, 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.

¶37

(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.

¶38

(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.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶41

das /19.01.2016

Balakrishna R. v. the Kerala Gramin Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balakrishna R. v. the Kerala Gramin Bank

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

Kaiprath Punnakkal Manoj Vs Sri. Asokan

Suseela Vs Dr P v Balachandran

Dr.C.v.James Vs District Collector

Dr.George Varghese Vs the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

M.C.George Vs Dist. Collector and Others

Aleema Ameen Vs Central Bank of India