Disposed

Joseph J Kuttikkattu v. Uco Bank

Kerala HC22 Mar 2016WP(C)/9130/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court entertained a writ petition challenging recovery steps under the SARFAESI Act due to loan default. Considering the petitioners' financial hardship, the court permitted repayment in ten equal monthly installments, staying recovery proceedings pending timely payments.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings stayed pending payment of outstanding amount plus accrued interest in ten equal monthly installments starting from 31.03.2016.

Joseph J Kuttikkattu Vs Uco 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 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2016/2ND CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 9130 of 2016 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

1. JOSEPH J. KUTTIKKATTU PART NO.2., DOOR NO.CC 37/3552, KUTTIKKATTU ANNEX DESHABHIMANI JUNCTION, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

¶8

2. JESSY JOSEPH,

¶9

W/O.JOSEPH J. KUTTIKKATTU

¶10

PART NO.2., DOOR NO.CC37/3552, KUTTIKKATTU ANNEX DESHABHIMANI JUNCTION, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.SAJI

¶12

SRI.V.M.SAJAN

¶13

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶14

1. UCO BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, M.G. ROAD RAVIPURAM, KOCHI - 682 016.

¶15

2. THE SENIOR MANAGER, UCO BANK, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI - 682 002.

¶16

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.DEEPAK JOY K., SC

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

...2/-

¶20

WP(C).No. 9130 of 2016 (M)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶23

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 23.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS.

¶24

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 23.2.2016 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

¶26

//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

¶28

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶29

¶30

W.P.(C) No.9130 of 2016

¶31

- - - - Dated this the 22^nd day of March 2016

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

The petitioners, 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.P2 is the sale notice issued to the petitioners under the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioners impugn the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(c).No.9130 of 2016

¶37

: 2 :

¶38

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

¶39

(i) The total outstanding amount, in respect of the housing loan is stated to be Rs.16,05,826/-. Accordingly, if the petitioners pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.16,05,826/- together with accrued interest, in ten equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 31.03.2016, then the recovery steps initiated against them by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶40

(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.

¶41

(iii)The respondent bank shall furnish the petitioners with an up-to-date statement of the dues position, within one week from today, so as to enable the petitioners to effect repayment as per the directions in this judgment.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶44

sm/

Joseph J Kuttikkattu v. Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph J Kuttikkattu v. Uco Bank

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.

Rajalekshmi Vs Authorised Officer