Allowed

Muhammed Rafi v. Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

Kerala HC10 Jan 2022WP(C)/130/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition by granting the petitioner an opportunity to repay the overdue loan amount in ten equal monthly installments with an EMI condition, keeping coercive proceedings in abeyance, and regularizing the account upon compliance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of Rs.23,00,000 in ten instalments with regular EMIs, keep coercive proceedings in abeyance, and regularize the loan account upon compliance.

Muhammed Rafi Vs Hdb Financial Services Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 20TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 130 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

MUHAMMED RAFI, AGED 52 YEARS,

¶8

S/O. M.K.BADARUDHEEN, SAFA MANZIL, KALLAMBALAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM.

¶9

BY ADVS. C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) M.R.SUDHEENDRAN ANANDA PADMANABHAN ABDUL JABBARUDEEN.M

¶10

RESPONDENT :

¶11

HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD.,

¶12

2ND FLOOR, PROCESS HOUSE, KAMALA MILLS, SENAPTHI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI AND BRANCH OFFICE AT SPRINGS, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR RELIANCE FRESH, EDAPPAZHINJI, THYCAUD P.O., TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND ASSOCIATE LEGAL MR.RENJITH C.R.

¶13

BY ADV.PAULOCHAN P.ANTONY

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO. 130 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶18

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶19

W.P.(C) No.130 of 2022

¶20

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶21

Dated this the 10^th day of January, 2022

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Petitioner as borrower from the respondent bank, has committed default in repayment. Consequently, proceedings have been initiated by the bank for recovery of the amounts due.

¶24

During the course of hearing, petitioner has confined the relief to an opportunity for repaying the overdue amount in instalments and to obtain regularisation of the loan account.

¶25

It was submitted on behalf of the respondent bank that the petitioner committed default in repayment and the overdue amount is Rs.23,00,000/-. It was further submitted that though proceedings for recovery have been initiated, as a matter of indulgence, the respondent bank is willing to accept repayment of the overdue amount in limited instalments and regularise the loan account.

¶26

I have heard Sri.C.Unnikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Paulochan P.Antony, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶27

Having regard to the circumstances of the case and the situation now prevailing, apart from the submissions made as recorded above, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity

¶28

WP(C) NO. 130 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

to repay the overdue amount in '10' instalments and thereafter, if the amount so directed is repaid within the time as directed above, to have the loan account regularised.

¶31

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank

¶32

to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.23,00,000/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan account of the petitioner on the following conditions :

¶33

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.23,00,000/- shall be repaid in '10' equated monthly instalments.

¶34

(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 31.01.2022.

¶35

(iii) Petitioner shall continue to pay the regular EMI’s along with the instalments directed above.

¶36

(iv) In the event of default of any one instalment, the respondent bank shall be entitled to proceed in accordance with law.

¶37

(v) In order to enable the petitioner to repay the entire amounts, all coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance.

¶38

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶41

RKM

¶42

WP(C) NO. 130 OF 2022

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 130/2022

¶45

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶46

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.7.2021.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SENT TO THE RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH EMAIL DATED 30.7.2021.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 28.12.2021.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE WARRANT AUTHORIZING COMMISSIONER TO TAKE POSSESSION DATED 6.12.2021.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONERS FIRM MAINTAINED AT STATE BANK OF INDIA, ICICI BANK AND FEDERAL BANK, KALLAMBALAM BRANCH.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

Muhammed Rafi v. Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Rafi v. Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

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

Anoop K.K., Vs the Authorised Officer

A.Jogesh Vs Kannur District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Ramla Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Shanoj a.H, Vs Canfin Homes Ltd.

Babu Cherian Vs Union of India

Gopinathan.P., Vs the Authorised Officer