Allowed

Vahab C.P. v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC11 Feb 2019WP(C)/3109/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court allowed the petitioner to regularize a housing loan default. The court granted a moratorium on SARFAESI recovery proceedings contingent upon the payment of default dues and interest in six monthly installments. Failure to comply would permit the respondent to proceed with coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings under the SARFAESI Act set in abeyance provided the petitioner pays default dues of Rs.88,296/- plus interest in six equal monthly installments without breaching the schedule.

Vahab C.P. Vs the Authorised Officer — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

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

¶5

WP(C).No. 3109 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

VAHAB C.P. S/O. MAMMADKUTTY, CHERUPALLIKKAL HOUSE, ERANHIKODE, CHALLIPADAM, EDAVANNA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 676 541.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.VIDYASAGAR

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MALAPPURAM BRANCH, MALAPPURAM 676 505.

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

SC ADV. K.M.ANEESH

¶13

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

¶14

WP(C).No. 3109 of 2019

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The writ petition is filed seeking directions to

¶18

the respondents to keep in abeyance Ext.P1 proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had availed a housing loan of Rs.5 lakhs on 16.11.2015 with a term of 15

¶20

years. It is submitted that alleging default, the respondents have initiated proceedings against him under the SARFAESI Act as evident from Ext.P1 notice. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was unable to pay the installments in time only due to financial stringency and that the entire amount in default will be cleared, if some time is granted.

¶21

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the defaulted amount, as on today would come to Rs.88,296/-.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and considering the plea of financial

¶23

WP(C).No. 3109 of 2019 3

¶24

stringency urged by the petitioner, I am of the opinion that some time can be granted to the petitioner to regularize the loan amount.

¶25

In the above view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with the following

¶26

directions :-

¶27

(i) The petitioner shall pay off the amount in default ie., Rs.88,296/with

¶28

accrued interest in 6 equal monthly installments, along with the regular

¶29

installments due from the month of March onwards without default.

¶30

(ii) If the petitioner is remitting the

¶31

aforesaid installments in time, without any default, all recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance, so as to enable the petitioner to pay off the entire dues in monthly installments, as above.

¶32

(iii) In case any default is committed by the petitioner in remitting any one of the aforesaid

¶33

WP(C).No. 3109 of 2019

¶34

¶35

installments, it would be open to the respondent to proceed further with the coercive steps, from the stage at which they presently stand, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN

JUDGE

sab

WP(C).No. 3109 of 2019

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶44

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 3.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 13 (4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT.

Vahab C.P. v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vahab C.P. v. the 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

Shine Jose Vs Abdul Hameed

Leo George Vs Antony Scaria

James.C.Sebastian, Vs Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation

Mohammed Kaleel, Vs State of Kerala

M.C.Jose, Vs Jeevan Babu.K,I.a.S

Thomas Mathew Vs the District Collector, Alappuzha