Disposed

T.P. Surendran v. Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank

Kerala HC12 Dec 2017WP(C)/27295/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a sale notice, the petitioner sought to remit loan dues in installments. The High Court directed the bank to share the arbitral award and accounts, permitting repayment in 12 monthly installments against a security deposit, while staying recovery proceedings temporarily.

What did the court decide?

Bank to permit payment in 12 monthly installments; stay of recovery proceedings for one month subject to deposit of Rs.1,00,000.

T.P. Surendran Vs Mulakulam Service… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 27295 of 2017 (J) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

T.P. SURENDRAN S/O.PARAMESWARAN THAZHATHINCHIPARAMBIL HOUSE AYAMKUDI.P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 613

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.LEGY ABRAHAM

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. SPECIAL SALES OFFICER MULAKKULAM SCB LTD NO.209 GROUP, ASSISTANT REGISTER (GENERAL) OFFICE VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM-686141

¶11

2. KADUTHURUTHI KARSHIKA SERVICE CO-OPERATION BANK LTD NO.1233, MANNAR, POOZHIKOLE.P.O. KOTTAYAM- 686 604

¶12

R2 BY ADV. SRI.SALIM V.S. R2 BY ADV. SRI.REJI JOSEPH R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C).No. 27295 of 2017 (J) ----------------------------

¶15

APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3.2.2017 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26.5.2017 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.7.2017 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.7.2017 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL ----------------------

¶16

TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE

¶17

Scl.

¶18

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

¶19

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶20

Dated this the 12^th day of December, 2017

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner, who availed a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the second respondent Bank, is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext. P4 sale notice dated 10.7.2017 issued by the first respondent and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit him to remit the amount due in the aforesaid loan transaction in 24 equal monthly installments.

¶23

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second respondent Bank wherein it has been stated that in view of the default committed by the petitioner, the Bank initiated arbitration proceedings, which culminated in an award dated 23.10.2014 in A.R.C.No.2224 of 2012, for a sum of Rs.7,90,489/-. As the petitioner failed to make payment, Ext.P4 sale notice was issued on 10.7.2017 for recovering a

¶24

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶25

-2-

¶26

sum of Rs.9,26,098/-. In the counter affidavit, it has also been stated that out of the liability shown in Ext.P4 sale notice, the petitioner made a payment of Rs.1,50,000/- on 27.7.2017. Out of which, Rs.1,44,925/- was adjusted towards interest and balance towards expenses. Now the amount outstanding is Rs.7,76,098/-.

¶27

The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dated 11.12.2017, wherein he has raised a contention that a copy of the award in A.R.C.No.2224 of 2012 is not yet served on the petitioner and that, the amount demanded in Ext.P4 is on a higher side, when compared to the demand of Rs.6,58,533/made in Ext.P2 demand notice dated 26.5.2017.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for the second respondent Bank.

¶29

During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is preferred to pay off the actual amount due to the respondent Bank within a reasonable time and that he may be granted

¶30

-3-

¶31

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶32

permission to repay the said amount in monthly installments. The learned counsel would also submit that the second respondent Bank may be directed to furnish a copy of the award and also the statement of accounts in respect of the loan availed by the petitioner.

¶33

The learned counsel for the second respondent Bank would submit that the amount shown in Ext.P4 demand notice is strictly in tune with the award passed by the arbitrator in A.R.C.No.2224 of 2012 dated 23.10.2014 and that, a copy of the award and the statement of accounts shall be furnished to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment. The learned counsel has also submitted that, the respondent Bank has no objection in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire liability in 12 equal monthly installments.

¶34

After considering the rival submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶35

(i) Within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this

¶36

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶37

-4-

¶38

judgment, the second respondent Bank shall provide a copy of the award in A.R.C.No.2224 of 2012 to the petitioner along with the statement of accounts in respect of the loan availed by him, showing the balance amount due.

¶39

(ii) Within two weeks from the date of receipt of the statement of accounts, the petitioner shall submit an application before the second respondent Bank seeking permission to repay the amount outstanding in 12 equal monthly installments.

¶40

(iii) If such a request is received, the second respondent Bank shall consider the same and permit the petitioner to remit the amount outstanding in 12 equal monthly installments. On such permission being grated, the petitioner shall pay off the entire liability in 12 monthly installments, without any default.

¶41

(iv) As a condition for stay of recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 demand notice for a period of one moth from this date, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with the second respondent Bank within

¶42

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶43

-5-

¶44

a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶45

(v) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits default in remitting any one of the aforesaid installments, it will be open to the respondent Bank to proceed further with Ext.P4.

¶46

Sd/ANIL K. NARENDRAN

¶47

JUDGE

¶48

Scl/12.12.2017

¶49

W.P.(C) No. 27295 of 2017

¶50

-6-

T.P. Surendran v. Mulakulam Service Co-Operative Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.P. Surendran v. Mulakulam Service Co-Operative 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

Jose Varghese Vs the Regional Service Co-Operative Bank, Kaduthuruthy Branch

Pradeep.S Vs the Special Sale Officer

Isha Athussunna Al-Islamia Juma Masjid Vs the State of Kerala

Punja Special Officer, Punja'S Special Office, Alappuzha Vs Sreejith T.K

Sujatha Mathummal Vs the Kannur District Co-Operative Bank

Shaji.M.N Vs Commissioner of Excise