Allowed

Hemalatha v. the Authorised Officer Under Securitization Act

Kerala HC30 Oct 2017WP(C)/27671/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered a writ petition impugning recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act initiated by a bank due to loan defaults. Accepting the petitioners' plea of financial hardship, the court allowed repayment of outstanding amounts in eleven monthly installments, keeping bank recovery proceedings in abeyance, on failure of which they stand revoked. A direction for furnishing an updated dues

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to remit outstanding amounts in eleven equal monthly installments; recovery proceedings kept in abeyance; bank directed to furnish updated dues statement.

Hemalatha Vs the Authorised Officer Under… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017/8TH KARTHIKA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 27671 of 2017 (H)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1. HEMALATHA, W/O.SHIVA KUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT RAJ NIVAS, VADAYATTUKOTTA, AND KOLLAM-691001.

¶8

2. SHIVAKUMAR. K PROPRIETOR OF M/S SREE KRISHNA TRADERS, RAJ NIVAS, VADAYATTUKOTTA, KOLLAM - 691001

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.KIRANLAL

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER SECURITIZATION ACT, STATE BANK OF INDIA, PAIKKADA ROAD BRANCH, PAIKKADA ROAD, ANDAMUKKAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001.

¶12

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, PAIKKADA ROAD BRANCH, PAIKKADA ROAD, ANDAMUKKAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001.

¶13

BY SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE, SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-10-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

WP(C).No. 27671 of 2017 (H)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 24/7/2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AS WELL AS GUARANTORS

¶20

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶25

W.P.(C). No. 27671 of 2017 ===================================================== Dated this the 30^th day of October, 2017

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The petitioners, who had availed three loans 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.P1 is the possession 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.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

-2-

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 27671 of 2017

¶32

(i) The total amount outstanding, in respect of the housing loan and a loan incidental to the housing loan as on today, is stated to be Rs.6,24,000 + Rs.3,52,000/- respectively. Similarly, the total amount outstanding under the working capital loan is stated to be Rs.54,36,000/-. Accordingly, if the petitioners pay the total amount of Rs.64,12,000/together with accrued interest from 31.08.2017 and other charges, in eleven equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 13.11.2017, then the recovery steps initiated against them by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶33

(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.

¶34

(iii)The respondent bank shall furnish the petitioners with an up-to-date statement, of the dues position together with interest, within 10 days from today so as to enable the petitioners to discharge their liability in accordance with the directions in this judgment.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶37

das/ 30.10.2017

Hemalatha v. the Authorised Officer Under Securitization Act

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemalatha v. the Authorised Officer Under Securitization Act

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

M/S.Alwaye Sugar Agency Vs the Asst Commissioner (Assmt)

Fred George Vs Dewan Housing Fiancne Corporation Ltd.

Alpha International Vs State of Kerala

Sareenivasan Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

P.M.Manual Vs Thrissur Corporation

Mullackal Agencies Vs Commercial Tax Officer