Remanded

Elizabeth John v. General Manager, District Industries Centre

Kerala HC21 Mar 2016WP(C)/8572/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank recovery proceedings against a loan defaulting petitioner were suspended. The high court permitted payment of the total dues in eight monthly installments, directing the bank to keep steps in abeyance pending compliance, warning of resumption of recovery upon default.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance; petitioner must remit total dues via eight monthly installments starting 31-03-2016; default leads to resumption of recovery.

Elizabeth John Vs General Manager, District Industries… — 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 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/1ST CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 8572 of 2016 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

MRS.ELIZABETH JOHN (MANAGING PARTNER-M/S.PEJAY PVC PRODUCTS) PLAVILAYIL HOUSE, MANJAKKALA P.O., THALAVOOR - 691 508.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) SRI.P.R.MILTON

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM- 691 001.

¶11

2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICE, CANARA BANK ,

¶12

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001.

¶13

3. THE BRANCH MANAGER CANARA BANK, PIDAVOOR BRANCH

¶14

PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM-689 695.

¶15

R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. LILLY K.T. R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN, SC

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

...2/-

¶19

WP(C).No. 8572 of 2016 (V)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20-10-2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23-11-2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 21-12-2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶25

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1-1-2016 ISSUED U/S 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶26

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BANK ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12-01-2016

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶32

W.P.(C). No. 8572 of 2016

¶33

===================================================== Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2016

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

The petitioner, who had availed of two term loans as also a cash credit facility 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.P4 is the notice issued to the petitioner under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶36

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

¶37

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the

¶38

case and the submissions made across the bar, I note that the sole prayer of the petitioner is to permit her to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into

¶39

W.P.(C). No. 8572 of 2016

¶40

-2-

¶41

account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-

¶42

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the two term loans, is stated to be Rs.18,63,997/- as on today. Similarly, the cash credit facility is overdrawn to an extent of Rs.5,44,688/- as on 01.03.2016. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.24,08,685/- together with accrued interest and the interest that is accrued on the overdraft amount, in eight equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 31.03.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installments as per the original loan schedule in the two term loan accounts, and complies with the formalities insisted by the respondent bank for continuing the overdraft facility, then the recovery steps initiated against her by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶43

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

¶44

(iii) The respondent bank shall, within ten days from today, provide the petitioner with an upto-date

¶45

-3-

¶46

W.P.(C). No. 8572 of 2016

¶47

statement of accounts so as to enable the petitioner to discharge the liability in accordance with the directions of this judgment.

¶48

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶49

das /21.03.2016

Elizabeth John v. General Manager, District Industries Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Elizabeth John v. General Manager, District Industries Centre

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

Abdul Sathar Vs the Regional Transport Officer

S. Mohanan Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Neelammariyil Agencies Vs State Bank of Travancore

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