Partly allowed

Kadeeja v. Authorised Officer

Kerala HC8 Oct 2018WP(C)/29319/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner assailed SARFAESI proceedings. The Court observed it could not compel a bank to alter contractual terms. However, accepting the Bank's offer to regularize the account via instalments, the Court directed the petitioner to pay dues in ten monthly instalments, warning that default would allow the Bank to proceed with recovery outside the Court.

What did the court decide?

Directing the petitioner to pay accumulated dues in ten equal monthly instalments starting 05.11.2018 and continue regular instalments to regularize the loan account; failure to pay allows Bank to pro

Kadeeja Vs Authorised Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 16TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 29319 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

KADEEJA AGED 54 YEARS W/O ABDULRAHIMAN,RESIDING AT ALANKODE HOUSE,NEKRAJE KASARAGOD TALUK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ANOOP

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 AUTHORISED OFFICER THE KASARGOD DISTRICT CO-PERATIVE BANK LIMITED BADIADKA BRANCH,KASARAGOD DISTRICT PIN-671541

¶11

2 THE BRANCH MANAGER, KASARAGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,BADIADKA BRANCH,KASARAGOD DISTRICT,PIN 671541.

¶12

BY ADV. M.SASINDRAN

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶16

counsel for the respondent Bank, besides perusing the record.

¶17

-2-

¶18

W.P.(C). No. 29319 of 2018

¶19

The petitioner, a borrower from the respondent Bank, assailed the SARFAESI proceedings demanding the loan repayment. To have the loan account regularised, the petitioner has to pay Rs.3,63,468/- together with interest and other charges.

¶20

The petitioner's counsel has submitted that the petitioner, despite her best efforts, could not repay the loan because of her financial difficulties. The petitioner thus wants this Court to direct the respondent Bank to receive from the petitioner the outstanding loan amount in instalments.

¶21

Before proceeding any more, I may observe that expansive as the Court's jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India is; it does not, I am afraid, go to the extent of interdicting the contractual terms, especially in a financial transaction involving public money, and compelling the respondent Bank to agree for instalments.

¶22

But the delays and difficulties in coercive process of recovery well known, the Bank's counsel, on instructions, has submitted that the Bank is willing to regularise the loan account, by

¶23

-3-

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 29319 of 2018

¶25

collecting the outstanding amount in ten equal monthly instalments, along with regular instalments.

¶26

So based on the Bank's concession, this Court disposes of

¶27

the writ petition, directing the petitioner to pay the accumulated dues in ten equal monthly instalments, starting from 05.11.2018. The petitioner will, of course, continue to pay the regular instalments. If the petitioner pays the instalments as shown above, the Bank, as agreed, will regularise the petitioner's loan account. On the other hand, if the petitioner fails to pay any single instalment within the stipulated time, the respondent Bank can proceed without recourse to this Court.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE

¶30

das

¶31

-4-

¶32

W.P.(C). No. 29319 of 2018

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT ALONG WITH THE PETITION DATED 28.6.2018 WHICH IS NUMBERED AS CMP NO.637/2018-MC NO.164/2018

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE SEND BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 25.7.2018

Kadeeja v. Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kadeeja v. Authorised Officer

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

Suganan.K.K Vs the Kottayam District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Suganan.K.K Vs the Kottayam District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Thomas P.L. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Shanavaskhan Vs Authorised Officer

Shakey Shahul Hameed Vs Regional Passport Officer

Thankachan.M.Paul Vs Corporation Bank