Allowed

Robin George, v. the People Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (Head Office)

Kerala HC6 Feb 2019WP(C)/2947/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the petitioner to pay Rs.3,92,907/- plus charges and interest by 28.03.2019 to enable the respondent bank to regularize the loan account, warning of vacating the order and barring SARFAESI challenges upon default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs.3,92,907/ -plus charges and interest by 28.03.2019 to regularize account; failure will vacate benefit and bar SARFAESI challenges.

Robin George, Vs the People Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd… — 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

WEDNESDAY,THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 17TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 2947 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

ROBIN GEORGE, AGED 45 YEARS S/O GEORGE, AZHIKAKATH HOUSE, WINNERS ROAD, KOCHI-682 027

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.IEANS.C.CHAMAKKALA

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

THE PEOPLE URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD (HEAD OFFICE), THRIPUITHURA, PIN 682 301, REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.T.A.RAJAN

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 2947 of 2019

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner prays that a loan facility, availed of by her from the respondent-Bank, be directed to be regularised.

¶17

However, Sri.T.A.Rajan, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Bank, submits that in normal circumstances, regularisation of the account would not be possible, since the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.C.No.33467 of 2017 and had obtained a judgment from this Court wherein this prayer was allowed; but that he had not complied with the terms of the said judgment. He, however, offers, which I must say is in great fairness, in the given circumstances, that the Bank will allow the petitioner a last chance to regularize the loan account, provided he pays an amount of Rs.3,92,907/- being the overdues as on today on or before the close of this financial year.

¶18

Sri. Ieans C.Chamakkala, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that his client is willing to accept this offer and that this writ petition may be ordered on such terms.

¶19

In the afore circumstances, I direct the petitioner to pay the overdue amount of Rs.3,92,907/-, as on today, along with all applicable charges and interest, if any, on or before

¶20

WP(C).No. 2947 of 2019

¶21

¶22

28.03.2019; in which event the Bank will regularize the account

¶23

and allow the petitioner to service it as per the original loan sanction.

¶24

It goes without saying that if there is any default in making the payment as directed above, the benefit granted under this judgment would stand vacated and the Bank will be at liberty to recover the entire liability from the petitioner by continuing with the proceedings from the stage it is on this date.

¶25

I make it clear that the directions in this judgment are peremptory in nature and that the petitioner will have to comply with the same meticulously. I caution the petitioner that no further requests for extension or modification of this judgment will be permitted except in exceptional circumstances and that if the petitioner fail to comply with the directions herein, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and she will also be foreclosed from challenging the measures/proceedings taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act and impugned in this writ petition before any other alternative Forum or Court.

¶26

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶30

Dxy

¶31

WP(C).No. 2947 of 2019

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FORM THE RESPONDENT BANK

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 6.6.2018

¶37

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 26.12.2018

¶38

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.1.2019

¶39

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 25.1.2019

Robin George, v. the People Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (Head Office)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Robin George, v. the People Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. (Head Office)

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

Shanavas.K.v Vs the Manager

Panniyankara Oil Mils, Vs the Auhtorized Officer

Sumadevi.R Vs Federal Bank

Sherry.K.Joseph Vs the Deputy Chief Engineer

Mithun M.P, Vs Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Banak

Vijayan.v.P Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board