Disposed

Vasanthakumari T.K., v. the Authorized Officer

Kerala HC13 Jan 2020WP(C)/331/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court stayed coercive banking proceedings against a defaulting borrower. The court ordered the bank to provide a statement of dues and directed the petitioner to clear the amount in 8 monthly instalments. If complied with, no further steps would be taken; otherwise, the bank could proceed. The petition was finally disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Stay of further coercive proceedings; direction to petitioner to clear dues in 8 instalments; direction to bank to furnish statement of accounts within one week; liberty to bank to proceed upon defaul

Vasanthakumari T.K., Vs the Authorized Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.331 OF 2020(N)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VASANTHAKUMARI T.K., AGED 60 YEARS W/O.SETHUMADHAVAN P.K., PURAYATHATH HOUSE, PALLIPPADI, CHOLAKKUND, PARAPPUR P.O., KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 503.

¶8

BY ADVS. SMT.M.B.SHYNI SRI.DEEPAK RAJ SMT.C.P.ROOPA SRI.FRANCIS MATHEW

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, RACPC, 1ST FLOOR, STATE BANK BHAVAN, BANK ROAD, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 001.

¶11

2 STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, RAMANATTUKARA BRANCH, BUILDING NO.RKKP5/600 A1-A14, RAMANATTUKARA P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 633.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK, SC, SBI -R1 SMT.BINDUMOL JOSEPH, SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P(C). No. 331 of 2020

¶15

¶16

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶17

W.P(C). No. 331 of 2020

¶18

Dated this the 13^th day of January, 2020

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The prayers in the above writ petition (Civil) are as follows:-

¶21

“i) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ order or direction directing the respondent bank to stay all further proceedings under Ext.P1, possession notice.

¶22

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ order or direction directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to remit the entire existing due amount in 24 instalments and to regularize the loan.

¶23

iii) issue such other writ or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

¶24

Heard Smt.M.B.Shyni, the learned counsel appearing for the

¶25

petitioner and Smt.Binudmol Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank (State Bank of India).

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent State Bank of India was requested to get instructions in the matter. Today when the matter was taken up for consideration, Smt.Bindumol Joseph, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit on the basis

¶27

W.P(C). No. 331 of 2020

¶28

¶29

of instructions from the party that the petitioner has previously defaulted in the instalment facility given to him and therefore the respondent bank is no longer interested to consider his plea for regularisation of the loan account. But that the respondent bank is prepared to give a last opportunity to the petitioner by paying the entire outstanding dues in 6 equal monthly instalments, so as to close the loan account thereafter and that until then, the respondent bank will ensure that the further coercive steps pursuant to the impugned proceedings will be kept in abeyance. Further that in case the petitioner makes default of any one of the instalments then, the respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps in the impugned proceedings from the stage where it has stopped.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would prepare at least in 10 instalments to clear the entire outstanding dues.

¶31

After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances in the case and since the bank is not prepared to give reasonable time to enable the petitioner to clear off the entire

¶32

W.P(C). No. 331 of 2020

¶33

¶34

outstanding dues so as to close the loan account, this court is inclined to take the view that the petitioner could be given time so as to clear the said total dues in 8 equal monthly instalments. Due to persuasions made by this Court, the respondent bank does not appear to have any serious objections in the said suggestion made by this Court.

¶35

Accordingly, the following directions and orders are issued:

¶36

(i) The competent official of the respondent bank shall immediately furnish a comprehensive and authenticated statement of accounts pertaining to the instant loan transaction so as to precisely and clearly show the total dues to be paid by the borrower in the above transaction and the details may also be shown in the said statement, as to how the said figures have been arrived at, to the petitioner and this may be done within one week.

¶37

(ii) The petitioner shall clear the entire due amounts with all applicable charges and interest in 8 equal monthly instalments starting from 30-01-2020 and ending on 30-08-2020. Until then, further steps pursuant to the impugned proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. Further that the petitioner shall pay the regular EMI in time without fail.

¶38

(iii) In case the petitioner complies with the abovesaid directions, then the impugned proceedings shall be kept in

¶39

W.P(C). No. 331 of 2020

¶40

¶41

abeyance. Further in case the petitioner does not pay any of the instalments, then the respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed further with the impugned steps from the stage where it has stopped.

¶42

With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition (Civil)

¶43

stands finally disposed of.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

KAS

B.A. No. 331 of 2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANAORAMA DAILY DATED 11/07/2019.

¶52

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶53

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Vasanthakumari T.K., v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasanthakumari T.K., v. the Authorized Officer

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

Balan, Vs Authorized Officer Syndicate Bank

Ramakrishnan, Vs the Irinjalakuda Town Co-Operative Bank

V.Jayachandran Pillai, Vs the State Tax Officer (Wc)

Omana Syriac, Vs the Authorized Officer

Ummukulsu, Vs Federal Bank Limited

T.K.Thulasi Vs State Bank of India