The petitioner challenged a bank's refusal to reschedule a defaulted housing loan. The Court held that demanding instalments is not within the writ court's jurisdiction as loan rescheduling is a creditor's prerogative.
No order for instalments or rescheduling of the loan; writ petition dismissed.
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 DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
MONDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 16TH ASWINA, 1940
WP(C).No. 29930 of 2018
PETITIONER:
SHANAVASKHAN AGED 45 YEARS
MANGALATH HOUSE, NEAR VAYANASALA JUNCTION, PERUMPUZHA P.O., KERALAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 504, (FROM KAMPIL VILA THEKKATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, NEAR K.I.P, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM - 691 504).
BY ADV. MINI GANGADHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 AUTHORISED OFFICER
REPCO HOME FINANCE LIMITED, 3RD FLOOR, ALEXANDER SQUARE, NEW NO.2(OLD NO.34 AND 35), SARDAR PATEL ROAD, GUINDY, CHENNAI - 689 001.
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER, REPCO HOME FINANCE LIMITED, BEHIND ST.JOSEPH CONVENT, KOLLAM- 691 001.
BY ADV. SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 29930 of 2018
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner took Rs.38 lakh as housing loan from the respondent bank. In the course of time, he defaulted on the loan repayment, ostensibly, owing to his financial stringency. As a result, the respondent Bank served notice on the petitioner, demanding him to remit the defaulted amounts.
2. According to the petitioner, though he earnestly tried to clear the accumulated dues in his loan account, he could not succeed as his financial problems persisted. The respondent bank has initiated steps to take possession of the mortgaged asset. Under these circumstances, the petitioner seeks instalment facility.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank.
4. The facts are not in dispute: The petitioner had committed default; the respondent bank initiated recovery proceedings. The issue, pure and simple, is a contractual dispute—a commercial one at that.
5. It is impermissible to compel, even to expect, the
WP(C).No. 29930 of 2018
3
bank officials to respond to the petitioner's demand for instalments. Instalments he has since inception; what the petitioner now wanted is a rescheduling of the loan, which is the creditor's prerogative. And it is not in this Court's province.
For the above reasons, I dismiss the writ petition. No order on costs.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 19.01.2018 IN W.P.C NO.1962/2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30.01.2018 IN W.P.C NO.1962/2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF JOURNAL VOUCHER DATED 26.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR RECEIPT OF RS.7 LAKH. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FROM 01.04.2018 TO 31.03.2019 FOR LOAN ACCOUNT NO.1601860000254 AND CUSTOMER ID NUMBER:C160191696
WP(C).No. 29930 of 2018
4
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 16.08.2018 REQUIRING R2 TO ISSUED A STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 01.09.2018 BEFORE THE R2 REQUESTING TO ISSUED HIM A DEMAND NOTICE TO PAY OFF ENTIRE ARREARS AND CLOSE THE LOAN ACCOUNT ON ONE TIME SETTLEMENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN M.C.NO.868/2017 OF THE CJM COURT, KOLLAM. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY ORDER/WARRANT AUTHORIZING COMMISSIONER ADVOCATE TO TAKE POSSESSION OF PROPERTY IN M.C.NO.868/2017.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
NIL
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
SD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can compel a bank to grant a loan rescheduling or instalment facility to a borrower who has defaulted.
SHANAVASKHAN
REPCO HOME FINANCE LIMITED
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
