Partly allowed

Prasoon, v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC20 Feb 2019WP(C)/4496/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking regularisation of a defaulted vehicle loan. The Court granted conditional relief requiring the petitioner to pay outstanding dues by a specified date to secure the vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 5,39,031 by 28.03.2019 to regularise loan and recover vehicle possession. Default forfeits this benefit.

Prasoon, 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 MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 4496 of 2019

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

PRASOON, AGED 29 YEARS S/O SURENDRAN, RESIDING AT THEJUS, PANACHIVILA, EDAMULAKKAL P..O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.AJIVAS

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, INDUS IND BANK LTD, RAMA BHAVAN, NEAR PARUTHELI PALAM, TOLL JUNCTION, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682024.

¶10

2 THE AUTORISED OFFICER, INDUS IND BANK LTD., VARINJAM TOWER, NEAR HOTEL SHAH RESIDENCY, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691001.

¶11

BY ADV SRI.VARGHESE C. KURIAKOSE-SC

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 4496/19

JUDGMENT

The singular prayer of the petitioner in

¶17

this writ petition is that a Vehicle Loan,

¶18

availed of by him from the respondent-Bank, be allowed to be regularised.

¶19

Sri. Varghese C. Kuriakose, the learned

¶20

Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-

¶21

Bank, submits that the loan in question is

¶22

terribly out of order, constraining the Bank to take repossession of the vehicle and he says that during such process, the petitioner had even attacked the authorised Officers of the Bank. He says that normally, therefore, the Bank would not be willing to give any further latitude to the petitioner. After saying so, he adds, which I must say is very fair in the given circumstances, that if the petitioner is willing to pay off the entire overdues in the account, which is Rs.5,39,031/-, as on 20.02.2019, along with all applicable charges and interest, on or before 28.03.2019, the Bank will regularise his

¶23

WPC 4496/19

¶24

¶25

loan account and also deliver back possession of

¶26

the vehicle. He also says that the petitioner

¶27

has two other loan accounts, which are also in the Non Performing Asset status and that the latitude now being shown to him is as a last chance and purely as an indulgence.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶29

Sri. V.A. Ajivass, submits that his client

¶30

accepts this offer and that this writ petition be disposed of on such terms.

¶31

In the afore circumstances, I direct the

¶32

petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.5,39,031/ - on or before 28.03.2019 ; in which event, the Bank will regularise the loan account in question and

¶33

return possession of the vehicle to the petitioner without any further delay.

¶34

It goes without saying that if there is any

¶35

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

¶36

WPC 4496/19

¶37

¶38

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

¶39

I make it clear that the directions in

¶40

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

¶41

of this judgment, save in exceptional circumstances, will be permitted and that if the petitioner fails to comply with the directions

¶42

herein, he will lose the benefit of this judgment and he 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.

¶43

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶44

SD/-

¶45

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

WPC 4496/19

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶52

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.12.18 ISSUED BY CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM TO THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN M.C.783/18 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 8.2.2019

Prasoon, v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasoon, 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

Selvanose Vs the Assistant Engineer

Jayaprakash, Vs South Indian Bank Ltd.

Penda Marketing Private Ltd. Vs the Branch Manager

V.v.Vimal Singh, Vs the Trichur Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Winston J.Stephen, Vs the Chief Manager (Authorized Officer)

Kimbee.K.a Vs the Regional Passport Officer