Disposed

M/S Sultan and Company, v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC11 Feb 2019WP(C)/2945/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted interim relief to a petitioner company facing SARFAESI proceedings, directing the Bank to accept partial payments followed by a 10-month installment plan, contingent on strict compliance.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 25 lakhs immediately and Rs. 50 lakhs by March 28, 2019; upon compliance, the Bank must allow the balance liability to be paid in 10 monthly instalments.

M/S Sultan and Company, Vs State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 22ND MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S SULTAN AND COMPANY, 32/1858,SURABHI ROAD, PADIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM-682 024, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.K.HUSSAIN, S/O K.A.KADHER,AGED 66 YEARS.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.A.R.NIMOD SRI.P.S.APPU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, R.S.BUILDING, OPPOSITE MAHARAJAS COLLEGE GROUND, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 011,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

¶11

2 STATE BANK OF INDIA, SME BRANCH, JOYS BUILDING, NEAR PADMA JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM- 682 035,REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER.

¶12

3 THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN - SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019 2

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner which is stated to be a

¶18

Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, prays that the respondent Bank be directed to allow them time to pay off the entire loan liability, which they had availed from them, in eaqual instalments.

¶19

Shri.S.Easwaran the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that the Bank is, in principle, agreeable to allow the petitioner to pay off the entire outstanding; but adds they should be directed to pay a minimum of Rs.75 Lakhs by the end of this Financial Year. He further says that the total amount due from the petitioner, as on 06/02/2019, is about Rs.3.6 Crores and that if they pay the aforementioned Rs.75 Lakhs on or before the end of this Financial Year, they can be allowed to pay the balance in 10 equal instalments commencing from April, 2019.

¶20

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019 3

¶21

Shri.T.C.Suresh Menon the learned

¶22

counsel appearing for the petitioner, in

¶23

response to the above, says that his client

¶24

has already taken a Demand Draft for Rs.25

¶25

Lakhs to show their bonafides and that the copy

¶26

of the same has been placed on record as Ext.P6. He says that this Demand Draft can be handed over to the Bank any day and that the petitioner will pay the balance of Rs.50 Lakhs by 28/03/2019. He says that his client is fully agreeable to the suggestions of the Bank, that they can pay off the balance in 10 instalments and prays that this Writ Petition be disposed of on such terms.

¶27

In the aforesaid Circumstances, I order this Writ Petition and direct the petitioner to handover to the Bank the original of Ext. P6 Demand Draft, for an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs, within a period of 2 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment and to pay

¶28

a further amount of Rs.50 Lakhs on or before 28/03/2019. If the petitioner makes payment of

¶29

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019 4

¶30

these amounts then the Bank will allow them to

¶31

pay off the balance of Rs.3.6 Crores, along with all applicable charges and interest, in 10 equal monthly instalments commencing from 30/04/2019.

¶32

It goes without saying that if there is

¶33

any default in making the payment as directed above, the benefit granted under this judgment would stand vacated and the Bank will be at

¶34

liberty to recover the entire liability from

¶35

the petitioner by continuing with the proceedings from the stage it is on this date.

¶36

I make it clear that the directions in

¶37

this judgment are peremptory in nature and that the petitioner will have to comply with the same meticulously. I caution the petitioner

¶38

that no further requests for extension or

¶39

modification of this judgment will be

¶40

permitted, save in exceptional circumstances, and that if the petitioner fail to comply with

¶41

the directions herein, they will lose the

¶42

benefit of this judgment and they will also be

¶43

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019 5

¶44

foreclosed from challenging the measures/ proceedings taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act, which are impugned in this writ petition, before any other alternative Forum or Court.

¶45

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

MC/12.2.19

¶50

WP(C).No. 2945 of 2019 6

¶51

APPENDIX

¶52

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶53

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF	THE	STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT
	ISSUED BY T 10.1.2019	HE 1	ST RESPONDENT DATED
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF T RESPONDENT TO T FAMILY MEMBERS	HE NOT HE PAR DATED	ICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST TNERS AS WELL AS THEIR 28.12.2018
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF T THE PETITIONER	HE POS DATED	TAL COVER ADDRESSED TO 29.12.2018
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF WHICH CAME IN 4.1.2019	THE THE	NEWSPAPER PUBLICATION MATHRUBHUMI DAILY ON
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER BEFO	THE RE THE	REQUEST MADE BY THE BANK DATED 31.11.2018
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF 24.1.2019	THE	DEMAND NOTICE DATED

¶54

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶55

NIL

¶56

¶57

(TRUE COPY) PA TO JUDGE

M/S Sultan and Company, v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sultan and Company, v. State Bank of India

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

K.Abdul Nazar, Vs the Manager

Muhammed Shafi Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

Shaji, Vs Kozhikode District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Elsy Paul, Vs State of Kerala

Kiran Kumar T.S., Vs Thiruvananthapuram District Co. Operative Bank

Unnikrishnan.v.M., Vs LIC Housing Finance Ltd.