Allowed

Abdu T.P. v. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Fianance Ltd.

Kerala HC31 Aug 2016WP(C)/9970/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenges recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The Court allowed the petitioners to pay dues in installments instead of immediate possession, granting them a chance to regularize their loan.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners to pay overdue amount with interest in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 26.09.2016 and remit future monthly instalments as per agreement; default to allow Bank to proceed legall

Abdu T.P. Vs Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Fianance Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/9TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 9970 of 2016 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ABDU T.P., S/O.POKKER, AGED 51 YEARS, THOTTUMPURATH HOUSE, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 571.

¶8

¶9

2. RAMLA ABDU, W/O.ABDU, AGED 41 YEARS, THOTTUMPURATH HOUSE, KUNNAMANGALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE -673 571.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.FIROZ, SMT.M.SHAJNA, SRI.S.KANNAN.

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

M/S. SUNDARAM BNP PARIBAS HOME FINANCE LIMITED, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SUNDRAM HOME FINANCE LIMITED), SUNDARAM TOWERS, 46, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600 014, REP. BY VIVEK P.B, AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

rs.

¶16

WP(C).No. 9970 of 2016 (U)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE C.M.P NO.1845 OF 2015 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF INSPECTION ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 8/3/2016, APPOINTED IN C.M.P NO.1845 OF 2015 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE PROPOSING TO TAKE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONERS' PROPERTY ON 15.03.2016.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶26

W.P.(C).No.9970 of 2016

¶27

-----------------------------------

¶28

Dated this the 31^st day of August, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

Petitioners have approached this Court being faced with proceedings initiated by the respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act.

¶31

Petitioners had taken a housing loan for `8,14,526/- from the respondent Bank. The petitioners could not repay the monthly instalments in time on account of certain financial difficulties. In the meantime, proceedings had been taken by the respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the outstanding dues in instalments and will also pay the regular instalments if some time is granted.

¶33

Having regard to the fact that the petitioners had expressed their willingness to repay the amount in instalments, I am of the view that some indulgence can be shown to the petitioners.

¶34

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under:

¶35

(i) The petitioners shall pay the overdue amount with accrued interest in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 26.09.2016.

¶36

(ii) In addition to payment of the aforesaid amount, petitioners shall also remit monthly instalments as per the agreed

¶37

W.P.(C).No.9970 of 2016

¶38

¶39

terms.

¶40

(iii) If there is default in payment of any of the aforesaid amounts, it shall be open for the respondent Bank to take such steps in accordance with law.

¶41

(iv) The respondent Bank shall provide a statement of account to the petitioners showing the balance amount payable within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶44

Abdu T.P. v. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Fianance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdu T.P. v. Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Fianance Ltd.

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

Siddique v Vs the Calicut Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Rajesh Kumar N. Vs Repco Home Finance Ltd.

Saleena Beevi Vs the Chief Manager and Authorised Officer

Prasad Vs Shibu C

Roshini C.B. Vs State of Kerala

J.Alexander Vs Corporation Bank