Allowed

Biju Mathew v. the Authorized Officer

Kerala HC7 Oct 2022WP(C)/22863/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under S. 36 of the Securitisation Act, the Kerala High Court granted the petitioner fifteen monthly installments to clear his overdraft liability of approx. Rs. 95 lakh with the respondent bank, directing banks to keep coercive proceedings in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent bank to accept repayment of outstanding amount along with interest/cost in 15 equated monthly installments and kept coercive proceedings in abeyance.

Biju Mathew Vs the Authorized Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 22863 OF 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 15TH ASWINA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 22863 OF 2022

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

BIJU MATHEW
AGED 47 YEARS
SON OF MATHEW, CHEERAMATATHIL HOUSE,
PAYYAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670633
BY ADV C.P.PEETHAMBARAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED, REGIONAL OFFICE,
KVR TOWER, PAMPAN MADHAVAN ROAD,
TALAP, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670002

¶11

2THE BRANCH MANAGER,
SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED, THALASSERY BRANCH,
D.O. NO. 46/878-B, GUNDERT ROAD, OPP. FIRE STATION
AND TELECOM OFFICE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN -
670101
BY ADVS.
Sunil Shankar A
VIDYA GANGADHARAN(K/000424/2020)
SANDHRA.S(K/001610/2021)

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C) NO. 22863 OF 2022

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Petitioner has approached this Court challenging proceedings initiated

¶17

under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (hereinafter referred to as the Securitisation Act) for recovery of the amounts due upon an overdraft facility availed by the petitioner from the respondent bank.

¶18

During the course of hearing, petitioner has confined the relief to an opportunity for repaying the outstanding amount in instalments.

¶19

It was submitted on behalf of the respondent bank that the petitioner committed default in repayment and the outstanding amount is Rs.95,86,610/-. It was further submitted that while some indulgence can be shown to the petitioner, not more than six monthly instalments can be granted. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the total liability is amounting to Rs.95,86,610/-, the petitioner may be permitted to clear the liability in twenty equal monthly instalments.

¶20

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank.

¶21

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 to repay the outstanding amount in fifteen (15) instalments.

¶22

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the entire outstanding amount mentioned above, along

¶23

WP(C) NO. 22863 OF 20223

¶24

with bank charges, from the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶25

(i) Petitioner shall discharge the liabilities to the respondent bank by paying the entire outstanding amount mentioned above together with any accrued interest/costs in fifteen (15) equated monthly instalments commencing from 31.10.2022.

¶26

(ii) Petitioner shall pay the subsequent instalments on or before the last working day of every succeeding month.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶32

okb/

¶33

//True copy// P.S. to Judge

¶34

WP(C) NO. 22863 OF 20224

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22863/2022

¶36

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16/7/2021
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT .
Exhibit P-2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 31/5/2022
ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER .
Exhibit P-3TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30.6.2022
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT .
Exhibit P-4TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30/6/2022
ISSUED BY FEDERAL BANK, ULIKKAL BRANCH .
Exhibit P-5TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 1/7/2022
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT .

Biju Mathew v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Mathew 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

Raju George @ Varkey Vs the Authorised Officer

Shaji C. C. Vs Irinjalakkuda Town Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.55

Korath Rajesh Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax

Sheetal Jain, Vs the State Tax Officer

B. Madhukumar Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Vivek Vs State of Kerala