Partly allowed

Rajalekshmi v. Authorised Officer

Kerala HC22 Mar 2016WP(C)/8233/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition challenging SARFAESI Act recovery proceedings by granting directions. The court allowed the petitioners to remit the outstanding loan amount in a lump sum and ten monthly installments, keeping recovery steps in abeyance pending compliance.

What did the court decide?

Bank recovery steps stayed if petitioners remit Rs. 4,00,000 immediately and balance in ten monthly installments; bank must provide updated account statement within ten days.

Rajalekshmi Vs 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

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2016/2ND CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8233 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. RAJALEKSHMI, AGED 41 YEARS, D/O.MALLIKA, SREEPORAM, CHARALKALLUVILA VEEDU, MANALLOOR, NEYYATTINKARA P.O.

¶8

2. SHERLY, AGED 32 YEARS, W/O.ANILKUMAR, KARIKOTTUKUZHY, THALANIRA PUTHEN VEEDU, MANNAMKONAM P.O, NEYYATTINKARA.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SMT.M.BINDUDAS

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, HEAD OFFICE, KIZHAKKEKOTTA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023.

¶12

2. BRANCH MANAGER,

¶13

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, NEYYATTINKARA MAIN BRANCH, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 121.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, S.C

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

WP(C).No. 8233 of 2016 (D)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶20

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.12.2015 FOR TAKING DEJURE POSSESSION OF SECURED ASSET

¶21

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 19.12.2015.

¶22

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 25.02.2016.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶29

W.P.(C). No. 8233 of 2016

¶30

===================================================== Dated this the 22^nd day of March, 2016

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioners, who had availed of a consumption 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 issued to the petitioners under the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioners impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶33

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

¶34

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:-

¶35

-2-

¶36

W.P.(C). No. 8233 of 2016

¶37

(i) The total outstanding amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.10,24,217/- as on today. Accordingly, if the petitioners remit an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- on or before 31.03.2016 and the balance amount of Rs.6,24,217/- together with accrued interest in ten 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.

¶38

(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.

¶39

(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.

¶40

(iv) It is made clear that nothing in this judgment shall stand in the way of the petitioner for closing the loan even before the time granted in this judgment.

¶41

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

das /22.03.2016

Rajalekshmi v. Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajalekshmi v. 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

M.Harris Vs State Bank of Travancore

The Kidangoor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Sreevidya.K Vs Kerala Gramin Bank

Kumari Manoharan Vs Authorised Officer, Sbt, Piravom

K.N.Harikumar Vs the Authorized Officer Kottayam Co-Op.Urban Bank Ltd.

Joseph J Kuttikkattu Vs Uco Bank