The Kerala High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking relief to regularise a defaulted loan account. The petitioner failed to deposit the interim sum to stay the auction and argued for instalment payments. The bench found no entitlement to relief as the loan tenure had expired.
The writ petition fails and is dismissed; no relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
FRIDAY ,THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
PETITIONER/S:
RAJAN P. AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. IMBICHIKUTTAN, KAYANAAMPARAMBATHU, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., KOZHIKODE - 673 008.
BY ADVS. SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN SMT.A.SIMI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 CHEVAYUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NELLIKODE, KOZHIKODE - 673 016. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 SPECIAL SALE OFFICER/ARBITRATOR CHEVAYUR SCB GROUP, OFFICE OF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOZHIKODE - 673 004.
3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
BY ADVS. SMT.M.MANJU SRI.R.SUDHISH
R3 BY SRI. K.P.HARISH, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who availed a loan for Rs.3.75
lakhs from the 1st respondent Bank, which is a Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and the rules made thereunder, vide loan No.MR-824, by mortgaging property having an extent of 9¼ cents in Re-Survey No.139/1 of Nellikode Amsom Kovoor Desom, Chevayur SubDistrict in Kozhikode District, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to permit him to clear the overdues in eight equal monthly instalments and to regularise the loan account. The petitioner has also sought for other consequential reliefs, including a direction to respondents 1 and 2 not to proceed with Exts.P1 and P2 and to keep in abeyance all further proceedings in E.P.No.393/2015 in ARC No.3186/2014 in respect of loan No.MR-824, on the petitioner
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
3
effecting such repayment.
returnable within three weeks. The learned Senior Government Pleader took notice on admission for the 3rd respondent. This Court granted an interim stay of Exts.P1 and P2 and the auction sale proposed to be conducted on 07.08.2018 for a period of one month, on condition that the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.80,000/- within two weeks.
petitioner, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent Bank and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the 3rd
respondent. Despite service of notice, none
appears for the 2nd respondent Special Sale Officer.
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
4
Bank, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner, who availed a loan for Rs.3.75 lakhs on 03.09.2008 with a tenure of 5 years, has not chosen to make any regular remittance whatsoever,
after availing the loan. The total outstanding amount in respect of the loan account in question would come to Rs.9,13,022/-. On account of the default committed by the petitioner, the Bank initiated arbitration proceedings, which culiminated in an award passed by the Arbitrator
in ARC No.3186 of 2014. Thereafter, recovery
proceedings were initiated in E.P.No.393 of 2015, which is pending consideration. Despite the order of this Court dated 31.07.2018, the petitioner has
not complied with the condition stipulated therein by depositing the sum of Rs.80,000/-.
would submit that due to financial stringency, the petitioner could not comply with the condition stipulated in the order of this Court dated
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
5
31.07.2018. The learned counsel for the petitioner
would also submit that the petitioner may be permitted to clear the overdues in monthly instalments or in the alternative the 1st
respondent Bank may be directed to permit the
petitioner to settle the entire dues in one time settlement scheme.
could not point out any one time settlement scheme
which is force, after Navakeraleeyam Kudisika
Nivaranam, 2018. As already noticed, the
petitioner availed the loan on 03.09.2008 for a period of five years. The tenure of the said loan
had already expired on 03.09.2013. It is
thereafter, that the 1st respondent Bank initiated arbitration proceedings, which culminated in the
regularisation of the loan account or permitting
the petitioner to remit the overdues, since the
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
6
entire amount has become due after the tenure of
the loan account.
In such circumstances, having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court finds that the petitioner is not entitled for any of the reliefs sought for in this writ petition.
In the result, this writ petition fails and
the same is accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN,JUDGE
AV/4/12
WP(C).No. 25741 of 2018
7
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.06.2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.06.2018.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regularise the loan account by clearing overdues in eight equal monthly instalments.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for a one-time settlement scheme for the entire dues.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to stay orders preventing the auction proceedings of the mortgaged property.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
RAJAN P.
CHEVAYUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK NELLIKODE
SPECIAL SALE OFFICER/ARBITRATOR CHEVAYUR SCB GROUP
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES
ANIL K.NARENDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
