Allowed

Lenid Foot Care Private Limited Rep. by Its Managing Director v. Bank of Baroda, Rep by Its Chief Manager

Kerala HC19 Feb 2016WP(C)/89/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition by a company that defaulted on bank loans. Considering financial hardship, the court permitted repayment via installment of principal and interest over 12 months, stayed further recovery actions, and directed the bank to provide updated accounts.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted one-year installment stay of recovery proceedings for payment of total principal and accrued interest; bank directed to provide updated accounts.

Lenid Foot Care Private Limited Rep. by Its… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/30TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 89 of 2016 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

LENID FOOT CARE PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CP 16/29, KAITHAKUNDU, AYIKKARAPADI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶9

SRI.G.ANEESH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. BANK OF BARODA,

¶12

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,

¶13

1ST FLOOR, HOLIDAY CITY CENTRE,

¶14

OPP.KURISUPALLI, BANK ROAD,

¶15

KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001.

¶16

2. CHIEF MANAGER/AUTHORISED OFFICER,

¶17

BANK OF BARODA, 1ST FLOOR,

¶18

HOLIDAY CITY CENTRE, OPP.KURISUPALLI,

¶19

BANK ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001.

¶20

BY SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE)

¶21

BY SRI.K.M.ANEESH, SC ADVS. SRI.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR (KALIYANAM)

¶22

SRI.ADARSH KUMAR

¶23

SRI.BIJU VARGHESE ABRAHAM

¶24

SRI.DILEEP CHANDRAN

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

mbr/

¶27

WP(C).No. 89 of 2016 (I)

¶28

APPENDIX

¶29

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶30

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.07.2015.

¶31

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED IN C.M.P.NO.2122/2015 BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶32

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶37

.............................................................

¶38

W.P.(C).No.89 Of 2016

¶39

............................................................. Dated this the 19^th day of February, 2016

¶40

J U D G M E N T

¶41

The petitioner, who had availed of a cash credit facility and a term 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.P2 is the notice of the Advocate Commissioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶42

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

¶43

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I note that the sole

¶44

W.P.(C). No.89 of 2016

¶45

-2-

¶46

prayer of the petitioner is to permit him to remit the balance 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:-

¶47

(i) The total amount required for closing the cash credit facility is stated to be Rs.44,92,576/-. Similarly, the overdue amount in respect of the term loan availed by the petitioner is stated to be Rs.8,58,428/-. Accordingly, if the petitioner pays the total amount of Rs.53,51,004/together with accrued interest in 12 equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 03.03.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule in the term loan account, then the further proceedings initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶48

(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

¶49

-3-

¶50

W.P.(C). No.89 of 2016

¶51

proceedings against him from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶52

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

¶53

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶54

mns/19.02.16

Lenid Foot Care Private Limited Rep. by Its Managing Director v. Bank of Baroda, Rep by Its Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lenid Foot Care Private Limited Rep. by Its Managing Director v. Bank of Baroda, Rep by Its Chief Manager

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/S.Atlantic Lubricants & Specialities Pvt.Limited Vs Sethumadhavan the Commercial Tax Officer, Cherthala

K.K.Gopalan Vs Sri.S.Karthikeyan IAS

Sherly Sam Vs State Bank of Travancore

Vishnu Priya Vs the Branch Manager, Syndicate Bank,Mynagappally

Rajan Mathew Vs the Intelligence Inspector

K.Noushad Vs the Chief Manager, Indian Overseas Bank