Disposed

Usha.S v. the Authorised Officer

Kerala HC1 Feb 2021WP(C)/1774/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding a defaulted small loan. The court allowed the petitioner to repay the amount in ten monthly instalments with the condition that the respondent releases the secured assets upon full repayment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to repay the entire balance loan amount in ten equated monthly instalments; respondent to release secured assets upon full payment of loan and charges.

Usha.S Vs the Authorised Officer — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942

¶5

WP(C).No.1774 OF 2021(V)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

USHA.S, AGED 52 YEARS W/O.PRATHAPAN, KUTTANADIMELAVILA, PUTHEN VEEDU, MANCHA P.O., NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRUM-695541.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, NEDUMANGAD CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD NO. 3193, NEYYANTTINKARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM-695541.

¶11

R1 BY ADV. SMT.NISHA GEORGE

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No.1774 OF 2021 2

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 1st day of February 2021

¶16

Heard both sides.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had availed small loan amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh and fifty thousand only), for the purpose of establishing business. She could not repay that amount of loan in the due time, which was resulted in the respondent taking action for recovery of that amount of loan under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to repay the entire loan amount in ten equal monthly instalments commencing from this month. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent has no objection for this course of action proposed by the petitioner.

¶19

In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with the following order:-

¶20

The petitioner is permitted to refund the entire balance amount of loan account in ten equated monthly instalments commencing from 08.02.2021. If the petitioner refund the entire

¶21

WP(C).No.1774 OF 2021 3

¶22

amount of loan along with necessary charges as directed in this order, the respondent shall release the secured assets in favour of the petitioner, the possession of which is reportedly taken by the respondent.

¶23

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR

JUDGE

ajt

WP(C).No.1774 OF 2021 4

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶31

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION OF 13(2) OF SECURITISATION ACT DATED 01.02.2020.

¶32

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MC NO.645/2020 OF C.J.M, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Usha.S v. the Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha.S 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

Shanaz Shabeer Vs the Bank of Baroda

Shajahan Vs Hdfc Limited

P.Shyam Raju Vs the Authorized Officer

V.J.Sabu Vs the Authorised Officer

Ceat Limited Vs State of Kerala

Thankamany Vs State of Kerala