Disposed

Ramesan C.R. v. Thrissur Service Co-Operative Bank, Rep. by Its Secretary

Kerala HC9 Nov 2018WP(C)/25392/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a blind guarantor challenging a bank demand notice. The court granted a 10-month instalment plan to discharge dues and ordered recovery proceedings to stay conditionally on timely payments, allowing immediate coercive action upon default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs.42,19,366 in 10 monthly instalments; recovery proceedings to stay if no default; respondents to proceed on default.

Ramesan C.R. Vs Thrissur Service Co-Operative Bank, Rep… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 25392 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RAMESAN C.R., AGED 48 YEARS,S/O.RAJAGOPALAN, CHIRAPARAMBIL HOUSE,CHENGAMASSERY, PARALLAM P.O., THRISSUR-680 563.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMACHANDRAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THRISSUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, NO.R-1097, THRISSUR-680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, KURIACHIRA SCB GROUP, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, GENERAL OFFICE,IYYANTHOLE,THRISSUR-680 003.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.ALEX VARGHESE SRI.A.D.RAVINDRA PRASAD

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WPC 25392 OF 2018 2

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner, who stood as guarantor in a loan availed by his brothers for a sum of Rs.32,50,000/- from the 1^st respondent Service Co-operative Bank, which was availed on 22.02.2016, on the strength of the property offered as security by the petitioner, having an extent of 6.99 cents, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 demand notice dated 04.06.2018 issued by the 2^nd respondent Special Sale Officer and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant at least 3 months' time to discharge the debt by his own. In the writ petition it is averred that the petitioner owns another property at Coimbatore, which was earlier notified by the State of Tamil Nadu for a housing project. Now, the said acquisition proceedings are dropped and the petitioner is expecting a release order by the appropriate authority, within two to three months, and by sale of that property, he will be able to discharge the entire dues.

¶17

On 27.07.2018, when this writ petition came for

¶18

admission, this Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed

¶19

WPC 25392 OF 2018 3

¶20

post to the respondents, returnable within two weeks. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1^st respondent opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition, wherein it has been stated that the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner is in terms of Ext.R1(b) award passed by the Arbitrator in ARC No.942 of 2017 dated 29.08.2017. Ext.R1(c), which is the statement of account of the loan account in question would show that the total dues in the loan transaction in question comes to Rs.42,19,366/as on 21.08.2018.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent Bank. Despite service of notice, none appears for the 2^nd respondent.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed this writ petition on an expectation that, the release order in respect of his property at Coimbatore will be issued by the competent authority within two or three months and that, he will be able to discharge the entire dues towards the 1^st respondent Bank by sale of the said property. However, the petitioner is yet to get a release order from the competent authority. The learned counsel would submit that,

¶23

WPC 25392 OF 2018 4

¶24

considering the fact that the petitioner is a blind person, as borne out from Exts.P2 and P3 discharge summary, a lenient view may be taken and he may be permitted to pay off the entire dues towards the 1^st respondent Bank in 15 equal monthly instalments.

¶25

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent Bank would submit that, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner can be granted 10 months' to repay the entire dues together with future interest in monthly instalments.

¶26

Having considered the submissions made by the

¶27

learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶28

(i) The petitioner shall pay off the entire dues amounting to Rs.42,19,366/- in respect of the loan transaction covered by Ext.P1 demand notice together with future interest from 21.08.2018 in ten equal monthly instalments commencing from 01.12.2018 and the subsequent instalments payable on or before the first day of the succeeding months.

¶29

ii) If the petitioner is remitting the aforesaid instalments in time, without any default, all recovery proceedings

¶30

WPC 25392 OF 2018 5

¶31

pursuant to Ext.P1 demand notice shall be kept in abeyance, so as to enable the petitioner to pay off the entire dues, as above.

¶32

(iii) In case of any default committed by the petitioner in remitting any on e of the aforesaid instalments, it would be open to respondents 1 and 2 to proceed further with

¶33

the coercive steps initiated against the property of the petitioner offered as security.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

WPC 25392 OF 2018

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶41

EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 04/06/2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER (WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION).

¶42

EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 09/05/2018 ISSUED FROM AMRITHA HOSPITAL. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 18/06/2018.

¶43

1ST RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXT.R1(A): A TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN LEDGER REPORT OF MR.MANOHARAN OF THE MORTGAGE LOAN ACCOUNT WITH THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK DATED 21.08.2018. EXT.R1(B): THE COPY OF THE AWARD IN A.R.C.NO.942/2017 DATED 29.08.2017. EXT.R1(C): A TRUE COPY OF THE TOTAL OUTSTANDING AMOUNT OF MR.MANOHARAN AS ON 21.08.2018.

¶45

TRUE COPY

¶46

P.A. TO JUDGE

Ramesan C.R. v. Thrissur Service Co-Operative Bank, Rep. by Its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesan C.R. v. Thrissur Service Co-Operative Bank, Rep. by Its Secretary

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

Iverkala Service Co-Operative Bank LTD.NO.193 Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Nishad Punnayur Sekharan Vs State of Kerala

M.v.Rajendran Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

A.J.Joseph Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Susamma Abraham Vs P.v.Varghese

R.G.Harilal Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies