Allowed

Tijumon Sasi v. Indusind Bank Limited

Kerala HC17 Aug 2017WP(C)/8929/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition from a loan defaulter facing SARFAESI recovery proceedings. The court directed the bank to stay recovery actions if the petitioner deposits the overdue amount and interest in 10 monthly installments, reserving rights against guarantors.

What did the court decide?

Recovery proceedings stayed pending full payment of Rs.15,59,136 and accrued interest in 10 monthly installments starting 31.08.2017.

Tijumon Sasi Vs Indusind Bank Limited — 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 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/26TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 8929 of 2017 (M)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

TIJUMON SASI, S/O SASI PONGAPARAYIL HOUSE, VAZHITHALA KARA, PARAPUZHA, THODUPUZHA-685583.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJESH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1 INDUSIND BANK LIMITED, RAMA BHAVAN, PARUTHELI PALAM, TOLL JUNCTION, EDAPALLY-682024, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶11

*ADDL. 2ND RESPONDENT IMPLEADED:

¶12

2 SOMARAJAN V.G., THADATHIL HOUSE, ANTHINADU KARA, BHAGAM, LLAM VILLAGE MEENACHIL, KOTTAYAM.

¶13

*ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.7.2017 IN IA.11618/2017.

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C. KURIAKOSE ADDL.R2 BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 8929 of 2017 (M)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

----------------------P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.2.2017 P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE PUBLISHED IN DECCAN CHRONICLE DATED 18.3.2017

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

R2(A) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 1.9.2015 EXECUTED IN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THIS RESPONDENT

¶23

R2(B) THE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT DATED 29.7.2015 SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS.25,000/- TOWARDS PSNC CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT PVT. LTD. ERNAKULAM BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶24

R2(C) THE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT DATED 13.8.2015 SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS.6,20,000/- TOWARDS PSN CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT PVT. LTD. ERNAKULAM BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶25

R2(D) THE COPY OF THE DELIVERY NOTE DATED 14.8.2015

¶26

R2(E) THE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER MAKING PAYMENTS IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶27

R2(F) THE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SUIT DATED 22.12.2016 WHICH IS NUMBERED AS OS.1/2017

¶28

R2(G) THE COPY OF THE INTERIM INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 28.12.2016 (WRONGLY SHOWN AS 2017 I THE ORDER) ALONG WITH THE SCHEDULE OF THE PROPERTY

¶29

R2(H) THE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT AND THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 IN OS.1/2017 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, THODUPUZHA

¶30

WP(C).No. 8929 of 2017 (M)

¶31

R2(I) THE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.89/2017 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION

¶32

R2(J) THE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXHIBIT R2(H) COUNTER CLAIM

TRUE COPY

P.S. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶37

¶38

W.P.(C) No.8929 of 2017

¶39

- - - - Dated this the 17^th day of August, 2017

¶40

JUDGMENT

¶41

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.P1 is the demand notice issued to the petitioner by the respondents. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(c).No.8929 of 2017

¶45

: 2 :

¶46

(i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan availed by the petitioner, as on today, is stated to be Rs.15,59,136/-. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.15,59,136/- together with accrued interest and other charges, in 10 equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 31.08.2017, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule, then the recovery steps initiated against him by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

¶47

(ii) It is 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.

¶48

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

¶49

iv) I make it clear that, nothing in this judgment shall prejudice the contentions of the additional 2^nd respondent with regard to the rights of a guarantor

¶50

W.P.(c).No.8929 of 2017

¶51

: 3 :

¶52

as protected under the Indian Contract Act or any other law for the time being in force.

¶53

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶54

sm/

Tijumon Sasi v. Indusind Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tijumon Sasi v. Indusind Bank Limited

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

State Bank of India Vs Prasanna Kumari T.V

M.P. Job Vs the District Collector

M/S.Bhima Enterprises Vs Intelligence Inspector

Sudheesh Vs Malappuram District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

V.K.Abdul Salam Vs Mini Manuel

The All India BSNL Casual Workers Union (Intuc) With Office at Pala Vs the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central)