Allowed

S.R.Traders v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC31 Mar 2016WP(C)/7646/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners defaulted on a cash credit facility and challenged recovery proceedings. The court allowed remittance of the outstanding loan and interest in 12 monthly installments subject to no default. Recovery steps were suspended pending full payment.

What did the court decide?

Loan of Rs.50,38,754/ with interest to be paid in 12 monthly installments starting 20.04.2016; recovery proceedings stayed.

S.R.Traders Vs the Authorised Officer — 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

THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/11TH CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 7646 of 2016 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

1. S.R.TRADERS, PROPRIETOR: MR.ZAKKARIYA ABDUL RAZACK, 8/285, ERATTAYAL, MARUTHA ROAD, PALAKKAD.

¶8

2. MR. ZAKKARIYA ABDUL RAZAK, 2/65, II LANE, MARHABHA COTTAGE, PRATHIBHA NAGAR, KALMANDAPAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 001.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER DHANLAXMI BANK LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, DHANLAXMI BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, PUNKUNNAM, THRISSUR - 680 002.

¶12

¶13

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, DHANLAXMI BANK LTD., SULTANPET BRANCH, PALAKKAD- 678 001.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, S.C

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

WP(C).No. 7646 of 2016 (E)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶20

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS BY THE RESPONDENT BANK.

¶21

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.02.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶28

W.P.(C). No. 7646 of 2016

¶29

Dated this the 31^st day of March, 2016

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioners, who had availed of a cash credit facility from the respondent bank, defaulted in repayment of the same. Consequently, the respondent bank initiated proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act, to recover the loan amounts. Exts.P1 and P2 are the notices issued by the respondent bank. In the writ petition, the petitioners impugn 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 petitioners 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 petitioners is to permit them to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioners, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶34

-2-

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 7646 of 2016

¶36

(i) The total outstanding amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.50,38,754/- as on 30.09.2015. Accordingly, if the petitioners remit the aforesaid amount of Rs.50,38,754/- together with accrued interest from 30.09.2015, in twelve equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 20.04.2016, then the recovery steps initiated against them by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶37

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

¶38

(iii) The respondent bank shall, within ten days from today, provide the petitioners with an upto-date statement of accounts so as to enable the petitioners to discharge the liability in accordance with the directions of this judgment.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶41

das /31.03.2016

S.R.Traders v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.R.Traders v. the Authorised Officer

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

Thankappan P.K. Vs Ram Mohan, Chief Manager/Authorised Officer

K.C.Chandrasekharan Vs Authorised Officer

V.K.Kesava Panicker Vs the Authorised Officer, Canara Bank

State Bank of India Vs M/S.Kinship Services(India)Pvt.Ltd.

Anwar E. Vs Canara Bank, Sme Branch, Kullappully

Ansu Joseph Vs Federal Bank