Allowed

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

Kerala HC7 Jan 2022WP(C)/278/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the writ petition allowing the petitioner bank borrower to repay overdue amount 26.26 lakh in 20 monthly instalments and regularize account keeping coercive proceedings in abeyance on first instalment default bank may proceed

What did the court decide?

Directed bank to accept repayment of Rs.26,26,418- in 20 instalments starting 15/02/2022 with regular EMIs; coercive proceedings kept in abeyance pending repayment.

A.Jogesh Vs Kannur District Co-Operative… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 17TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 278 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

A.JOGESH AGED 50 YEARS S/O A BHARATHAN, BHARATHAM, NEAR FISH MARKET, PALIKKUNNU P O, KANNUR-670004. BY ADVS. C.RAJENDRAN B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 KANNUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD), REGIONAL OFFICE, P B NO.35, KANNUR-670001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER. 2 THE SENIOR MANAGER RECOVERY DEPARTMENT, AUTHORIZED OFFICER UNDER SARFAESI ACT, 2002, THE KANNUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, (NOW KNOWN AS KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.) REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR-670001. 3 SHABEENA RAJ ADVOCATE, BAR COUNCIL, THALASSERY, KANNUR-670101.(DELETED) (RESPONDENT 3 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 07.01.2022 IN IA.NO.1/2022.

¶10

BY ADV M.SASINDRAN

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 278 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶15

W.P.(C) No. 278 of 2022

¶16

Dated this the 7^th day of January, 2022

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

It was submitted on behalf of the respondent bank that the petitioner committed default in repayment and the overdue amount is Rs.26,26,418/-. 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.

¶21

¶22

WP(C) NO. 278 OF 2022

¶23

I have heard Sri.C.Rajendran, learned counsel for

¶24

the petitioner as well as Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶25

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 overdue amount in ‘20’ instalments and thereafter, if the amount so directed is repaid within the time as directed above, to have the loan account regularised.

¶26

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.26,26,418/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan account of the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶27

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.26,26,418/- shall be repaid in ‘20’ equated monthly instalments.

¶28

(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 15/02/2022.

¶29

WP(C) NO. 278 OF 2022

¶30

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

AJM

¶39

WP(C) NO. 278 OF 2022

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 278/2022

¶42

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶43

Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05.09.2019. Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CORONARY ANGIOGRAM REPORT ISSUED BY HOSPITAL DATED 28/08/2018. Exhibit P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD OF THE BABY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, CALICUT DATED 13.10.2020. Exhibit P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DIAGNOSIS NOTES OF DR.PRAVEEN KUMAR DATED 28.10.2020. Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 23.11.2020. Exhibit P6 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMISSIONER ADVOCATE'S NOTICE DATED 28/12/2021.

¶44

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS : NIL

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

PA TO JUDGE

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Rajan R. Vs the Authorised Officer, Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd.

Koorakkadan Ebrahim Rasheed Vs the Income Tax Officer

Jolly C.I Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board - Kseb

Anoop K.K., Vs the Authorised Officer

Ramla Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Aditya Infotech Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (Works Contract)