Disposed

Jameela Beevi v. the Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India

Kerala HC14 Dec 2021WP(C)/28192/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the bank to allow the petitioner one-time settlement of the loan via 12 equal monthly installments, with the bank free to initiate recovery proceedings in case of default.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to permit settlement of the loan account in 12 equal monthly installments starting from 10.01.2022.

Jameela Beevi Vs the Authorized Officer… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN TUESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 28192 OF 2021

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

JAMEELA BEEVI AGED 50 YEARS W/O. LATE NIZAR, MANICHIDATHU, NAMBARUVIKALA, ALUMKADAVU P. O., KOLLAM - 690 573.

¶6

BY ADVS. SRI. P.B. SAHASRANAMAN SRI. T.S. HARIKUMAR

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, UNION BANK OF INDIA KOLLAM BRANCH - 3 (ERSTWHILE CORPORATION BANK) HOTEL KARTHIKA COMPOUND, MAIN ROAD, KOLLAM - 691 009. 2 THE BRANCH MANAGER UNION BANK OF INDIA (E-CORPORATION BANK), ALUMKADAVU BRANCH, KOLLAM - 690 573. SRI. A.S.P KURUP – SC

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

W.P(C) NO.28192 OF 2021

¶11

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

This writ petition is filed seeking the following

¶14

reliefs:-

¶15

“i. To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Ext.P3 and all further proceedings thereto and quash the same;

¶16

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to provide the opportunity to the petitioner for one time settlement of the loan account and to accept the entire dues settled therein in 12 equal monthly installments.”

¶17

The petitioner has challenged Ext.P1 notice issued under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal – 2 (for short 'DRT-2'), Ernakulam by filing S.A No.71 of 2020. The said S.A is pending. During the pendency of the said S.A, Ext.P2 notice was issued by the Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the property. Pursuant to Ext.P2, the authorised officer issued Ext.P3 sale notice and challenging Ext.P3, the

¶18

W.P(C) NO.28192 OF 2021

¶19

¶20

petitioner has approached this Court. The petitioner limits her prayer for one time settlement of the loan account and to accept the entire dues settled therein in twelve equal monthly installments.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶22

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank submits that, the Bank is prepared to grant twelve monthly installments to the petitioner to settle the outstanding dues of Rs.27,15,000/- (Rupees Twenty seven lakh fifteen thousand only), on condition that the petitioner withdraws Writ Petition No.9142 of 2020 challenging Ext.P2 notice and the S.A No.71 of 2020 pending before the DRT-2, Ernakulam. The petitioner has today withdrawn W.P (C) No.9142 of 2020 and has undertaken to withdraw S.A No.71 of 2020 before the DRT-2, Ernakulam, once the regular sitting in the said court commence.

¶23

W.P(C) NO.28192 OF 2021

¶24

¶25

Accordingly, there will be a direction permitting

¶26

the petitioner to pay the amount due to the respondent Bank in twelve equal monthly installments commencing from 10.01.2022. In case, the petitioner makes default in payment of installments, the Bank will be free to initiate appropriate proceedings for the recovery of the entire amounts due to the Bank. The petitioner will be free to make appropriate application before the respondent Bank to avail benefits under one time settlement after remitting the first installment as above and the Bank shall consider said application with notice to the petitioner.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶30

SPR

¶31

W.P(C) NO.28192 OF 2021

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CORPORATION BANK, DATED 13.01.2020. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, DATED 18.02.2020. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, DATED 23.11.2021.

¶36

RESPONDENTS'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

Jameela Beevi v. the Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jameela Beevi v. the Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India

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

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Vs Reji George

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs a.K.John

Muvattupuzha Rubber Marketing Vs Employees Provident Fund

The Secretary Vs Reji M.V.

Kesilda .J Vs the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs

Smt.Laila Sasikumar, Vs the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner