Allowed

Ashai Kumar v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC6 Jan 2021WP(C)/284/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposing a writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings, the High Court, citing recovery interest and petitioner's constraints, directed payment of overdue dues in ten monthly installments to regularize the account, with removal of concessions upon default.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay Rs.3,22,645/- in ten equal monthly installments commencing 21.01.2021, plus regular EMIs.

Ashai Kumar Vs the Trivandrum Co-Operative… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.284 OF 2021(I)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 ASHAI KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS S/O. VIKRAMA KURUP, TC 52/1402, VISHNU NAGAR, ESTATE P.O., PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 019.

¶8

2 LAKSHMI PRIYA, AGED 37 YEARS W/O. ASHAI KUMAR, TC 52/1402, VISHNU NAGAR, ESTATE P.O., P APPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 019.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.S.JATHIN DAS SMT.S.SOUMYA ISSAC

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE TRIVANDRUM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE. PB NO.15, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER/RECOVERY OFFICER.

¶12

2 THE BRANCH MANAGER THE TRIVANDRUM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., THYCAUD BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶13

3 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER THE TRIVANDRUM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE. PB NO.15, MG ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

SMT. NISHA GEORGE - SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 284/21

JUDGMENT

Through this writ petition, the petitioners call into question certain

¶20

proceedings initiated and being pursued by the respondent Bank under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial

¶21

Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest

¶22

Act ('the SARFAESI Act' for brevity).

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel for

¶24

the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

¶25

As I proceed to consider the reliefs

¶26

prayed for by the petitioners herein, I am

¶27

conscious that I am jurisdictionally

¶28

proscribed from entering into any enquiry or consideration of the legality or otherwise of

¶29

the orders impugned in this writ petition on account of the imperative statutory provisions and the binding judicial pronouncements,

¶30

WPC 284/21

¶31

¶32

especially that of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon [(2010) 8 SCC 110] and in Authorised Officer,

¶33

State Bank of Travancore and Another v. Mathew K.C. [2018 (1) KLT 784] . I, therefore, cannot and do not propose to consider any of the legal contentions raised by the petitioners on its merits.

¶34

However, obviously being aware of

¶35

this, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has prayed that notwithstanding

¶36

the limitations of jurisdiction as

¶37

aforementioned, the petitioners may be granted some leniency or latitude in order to enable

¶38

them to pay off the overdue amounts in

¶39

installments.

¶40

I, therefore, enquired with the

¶41

learned counsel for the Bank as to whether the

¶42

request on the part of the petitioners can be

¶43

¶44

WPC 284/21

¶45

allowed, especially on account of the fact that the Banks are only interested in recovering and not in maintaining and keep

¶46

pending litigations and legal proceedings against such recovery. The learned counsel has fairly submitted that the Bank is concerned about recovery at the earliest and that if the petitioners pay off the dues quickly, it would be to their interest also.

¶47

In view of the fact that the

¶48

proceedings initiated by the Bank would

¶49

consume time to culminate in total recovery

¶50

and taking into account the financial constraints and burden that have been alleged and pleaded by the petitioners, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition allowing them

¶51

an opportunity to pay off the overdue amounts demanded by the Bank.

¶52

The learned counsel for the Bank at

¶53

WPC 284/21

¶54

¶55

this time submits that the petitioners can be

¶56

allowed to pay off the overdue amount of Rs.3,22,645/- as on 06.01.2021 in not more

¶57

than ten instalments commencing from

¶58

21.01.2021 and that the account can thus be

¶59

regularised by the Bank.

¶60

petitioners says that the petitioners are agreeable to the above offer made by the Bank and therefore that the writ petition may be ordered granting permission to the petitioners

¶61

to pay off the amount in the manner as afore.

¶62

In such circumstances, I direct the

¶63

petitioners to pay off the aforementioned

¶64

overdue amount of Rs.3,22,645/- as on

¶65

06.01.2021 , along with applicable charges and interest, in ten equal monthly instalments

¶66

commencing from 21.01.2021. They shall also,

¶67

in addition to this, pay the regular EMIs

¶68

WPC 284/21

¶69

¶70

without fail. If such payment is made by the petitioners, their loan account would stand regularised and they would then be at liberty to service the account as per the terms of the loan sanctioned. It goes without saying that if there is any 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 petitioners by continuing with the proceedings from the stage it is on this date.

¶71

directions in this judgment are peremptory in nature and that the petitioners will have to comply with the same meticulously.

¶72

WPC 284/21

¶73

¶74

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶75

Sd/-

¶76

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

WPC 284/21

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶83

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 5.2.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 14.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Ashai Kumar v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashai Kumar v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shine Plast Vs Assistant State Tax Officer

Mohammed Musthafa Vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sabu A.A. Vs the Authorized Officer

Prasannakumar Vs Hdfc Bank

Anoop Poulose Vs Joint Labour Commissioner

P C Sokan Vs the State of Kerala