Disposed

Sebastian S. v. the Authorized Officer

Kerala HC19 Oct 2017WP(C)/4464/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning a defaulted banking loan, the Court allowed the petitioner a chance to pay the outstanding amount in 12 equal monthly installments. The bank's recovery proceedings were kept in abeyance conditional on strict adherence to the payment schedule.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings kept in abeyance if petitioner pays Rs. 6,04,866/- plus interest and charges in 12 equal monthly installments commencing from 30.10.2017.

Sebastian S. Vs the Authorized Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017/27TH ASWINA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 4464 of 2017 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SEBASTIAN S., S/O. SANKARAN NADAR, ANSI BHAVAN, KANACODE, VATTAPPARA.P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE NEDUMANGAD CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.NO.3193, NEDUMANGAD-695 541.

¶11

2. THE NEDUMANGAD CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.NO.3193 MAIN BRANCH, NEDUMANGAD-695 541, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC. SRI.M.S.KALESH, SRI.HARISH GOPINATH, SMT.R.BINDU.

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-10-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

rs.

¶15

WP(C).No. 4464 of 2017 (G)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶18

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 22.06.2016.

¶19

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.12.2016 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN MC NO.1074/2016.

¶20

P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.01.2017 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶26

.............................................................

¶27

W.P.(C).No.4464 Of 2017

¶28

............................................................. Dated this the 19^th day of October, 2017

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner, 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.P3 is the notice of the Advocate Commissioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶31

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent bank.

¶32

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 petitioner is to permit him to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the respondent bank in easy installments.

¶33

¶34

W.P.(C).No.4464 Of 2017

¶35

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

¶36

(i) The overdue amount, in respect of the loan availed by the petitioner, is stated to be Rs.6,04,866/-. Accordingly, if the petitioner pays the said amount of Rs.6,04,866/- together with accrued interest and other charges in 12 equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 30.10.2017, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule, then the further proceedings initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶37

(ii) It is further made clear that if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, he will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against him from the stage at which they presently stand.

¶38

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

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

mns/19.10.17

¶43

W.P.(C).No.4464 Of 2017 3

Sebastian S. v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sebastian S. v. the Authorized Officer

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

Renjith M.P Vs the Syndicate Bank

Ansari a Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Dijoe Darvin Vs Indusind Bank Limited

K.Surendran Vs Jayakumar K.B

Shaini Franklin Vs the Authorized Officer& Assistant Manager

Mydhili Vs the Authorised Officer