Disposed

M/S.Heera Life Style(P)Ltd. v. the Chief Manager

Kerala HC2 Mar 2017WP(C)/3261/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging an e-auction for recovery of a loan default. The petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 2 crores immediately and the remaining overdue amount in six installments with regular EMIs. Non-compliance would allow respondents to proceed with lump-sum recovery. All legal questions were kept open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 2 crores by 31.03.2017 and balance in six installments. Non-compliance allows lump-sum recovery.

M/S.Heera Life Style(P)Ltd. Vs the Chief Manager — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2017/11TH PHALGUNA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 3261 of 2017 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M/S.HEERA LIFE STYLE (P) LTD., HEERA PARK, M.P. APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, A. ABDUL RASHEED @ DR.A.R. BABU.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON

¶9

SMT.KAVERY S. THAMPI

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE CHIEF MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, BRANCH OFFICE, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶12

2. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/MANAING DIRECTOR.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI, SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

msv/

¶16

WP(C).No. 3261 of 2017 (G)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE VALUATION REPORT WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMERCIAL AREA OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY IN IRUMPANAMTHRIPUNITHURA OF THE PROPERTY PREPARED BY THE APPROVED VALUER

¶20

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION LETTER DATED 18/03/2013 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER COMPANY

¶21

P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER SENT BY THE COMMANDANT, STATION COMMANDER TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 19/05/2016

¶22

P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/06/2016 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT

¶23

P5 TRUE COPY OF THE E-SALE OF THE PROPERTY PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS

¶24

P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11/01/2017 IN W.P(C) 24856/2016

¶25

P7 TRUE COPY OF THE E-AUCTION OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN ITS WEBSITE IS DOWN LOADED BY THE PETITIONER

¶26

P8 TRUE COPY OF THE E-AUCTION NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY BOMBAY EDITION DATED 23/01/2017

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

Msv/

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶33

W.P.(C) No.3261 of 2017

¶34

----------------------------------------------Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2017

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

Petitioner company availed a loan of Rs.15 crores from the respondents. The said loan was availed on the basis of Ext.P2 sanction letter. As per Clause 11 of Ext.P2 sanction letter, the principal amount of the term loan shall be paid in 72 monthly installments, after a period of 18 months moratorium. So, the petitioner has to commence repayment of the first installment of EMI only from 19^th month from the date of disbursement of the loan amount. The total period of monthly installments for remitting the entire loan comes to 90 months, and the term of repayment ends only in the month of August, 2020. The petitioner after availing the loan, remitted an amount of Rs.2.39 crores. However, without taking note of the same, now the respondents are proceeding against the petitioner to recover the amount by resorting to Ext.P7 E-auction proceedings. Various other contentions are raised by the petitioner contending that Ext.P7 is unsustainable in law, being arbitrary and violative of the principles laid down by

¶37

W.P.(C) No.3261 of 2017 2

¶38

the apex court in its various judgments. It is in this background, seeking appropriate directions, this writ petition is filed.

¶39

Respondents have filed a statement narrating the

¶40

facts in detail. It is also submitted that the loan had to be repaid by the petitioner, after moratorium, from 01.03.2015. The petitioner in accordance with the terms of the agreement

¶41

has to remit an amount of Rs.22,72,700/- from 1^st to 65^th installments and Rs.22,74,500/- as 66^th installment, together with interest starting from 01.03.2015 to 01.08.2020. Other contentions are also raised retorting the allegations and claims and demands raised by the petitioner in the writ petition.

¶42

In the nature of order I propose to pass after due deliberations with respective counsel, I do not intend to discuss other aspects and questions of law raised by the respective parties in the writ petition. Fact remains, an amount of Rs.10 crores is remaining overdue in the account of the petitioner towards principal amount and interest. Petitioner has offered to pay an amount of Rs.2 crores on or before 31.03.2017, and the balance overdue outstanding, as specified above, in six monthly installments along with the

¶43

¶44

W.P.(C) No.3261 of 2017

¶45

regular installments. The same is recorded and there will be a direction accordingly.

¶46

I make it clear, if the petitioner is not complying with the aforesaid directions, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law to recover the entire amounts in lump. If the petitioner submits a representation after 3^rd installment, to be paid after 31.03.2017, seeking regularization of the loan amount, the same will be considered by the 1^st respondent.

¶47

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly, directing the petitioner to comply with the aforesaid directions, and leaving open all the questions raised by rival parties in the writ petition.

¶48

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶49

//true copy//

¶50

P.S. to Judge

¶51

St/02.03.2017

M/S.Heera Life Style(P)Ltd. v. the Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Heera Life Style(P)Ltd. v. the Chief Manager

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

Intimate Machines Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kerala State Women'S Development Corporation Ltd.

Philip M.K. Vs Land Tribunal Special Tahsildar (Lr)

V.R Joseph, Vs State of Kerala

Janardana Kurup.N. Vs Kerala State Housing Board

Muralidharan Pillai Vs District Collector, Kollam

A.K.Abdulkhader Vs the Muvattupuzha-Kothamangalam Primary