Dismissed

Eco Rubber v. the Kerala Financial Corporation

Kerala HC9 Nov 2022WP(C)/6352/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a defaulting industrial establishment seeking directions to stay coercive recovery proceedings and allow a One Time Settlement. The court found no reason to entertain the petition due to the petitioner's failure to pay the stipulated sum as previously ordered, viewing the subsequent applications as an attempt to protract proceedings, while leaving

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to pay the principal amount and settle the loan account.

Eco Rubber Vs the Kerala Financial Corporation — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 6352 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

M/S. ECO RUBBER
MAYITHARA MARKET P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN-688539, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
SMT. BIJI SANJEEV, AGED 49, W/O. SANJEEV, KONCHERY
HOUSE, MAYITHRA MARKET P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, PIN-688539.
BY ADVS.
V.MAHENDRANATH
P.T.SHEEJISH

¶7

RESPONDENT:

¶8

THE KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION,
ALAPPUZHA BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
KUMARANASAN SMARAKA MANDIRAM, COURT ROAD,
ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY ADVS.
ADV. VENUGOPAL.M.R - SC
DHANYA P.ASHOKAN(K/001671/2000)
S. MUHAMMAD ALIKHAN(K/000644/2020)

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

WP(C) NO. 6352 OF 2022

¶11

¶12

V. G. ARUN, J.

¶13

W.P. (C) No. 6352 of 2022

¶14

Dated this the 09^th day of November, 2022

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner, an industrial establishment, had

¶17

availed a loan of Rs. 7 crores from the respondent Corporation in the year 2015. The loan fell in default, which according to the petitioner was due to the set back suffered by the industry, by Covid pandemic and the lock down. Although, respondent offered the benefit of One Time Settlement scheme, the petitioner was not able to pay the amount within the stipulated time. The respondent therefore initiated steps for recovery. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to keep the coercive proceedings in abeyance and to permit petitioner settle the account by availing One Time Settlement benefit.

¶18

After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶19

and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent at length, this Court had, by order dated 02.11.2022, directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rupees One crore within one month to prove its bona fides. It was also made clear that

¶20

WP(C) NO. 6352 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

failure to pay the amount within time will result in the writ petition being dismissed.

¶23

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not raise the amount of Rupees One crore and has filed I.A. No. 6 of 2022 seeking enhancement of time and I.A. No. 5 of 2022 for a direction to the respondent to recalculate the amount due in accordance with the master circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India. Having gone through the affidavits filed in support of the petition for enhancement of time and the petition for direction, I am of the considered opinion that the attempt is to protract the proceedings. The petitioner failed to pay the amounts availing the One Time Settlement benefit and also failed to remit the amount as per the direction of this Court. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that even at this point of time the respondent is willing to close the account if the principal amount is paid. On this, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the principal amount is not reckoned in tune with the master circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India and hence, the petitioner is not in a position to pay the amount.

¶24

WP(C) NO. 6352 OF 2022

¶25

¶26

In the above circumstances, I find no reason to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is hence dismissed, without prejudice to the petitioner’s right to pay the principal amount and settle the loan account immediately, or to approach the appropriate legal forum for its remedies.

¶27

Sd/- V. G. ARUN JUDGE

¶28

san

¶29

WP(C) NO. 6352 OF 2022

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6352/2022

¶32

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.7.2021 IN
WP(C) NO.9655/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.1.2022 IN
WP(C) 2275/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE OFFER LETTER DATED 7.2.2022
FOR OTS OF RS.2.50 CRORES, PLACED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.4.2021
INDICATING INITIATION OF COERCIVE ACTION ISSUED BY
THE RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5GRIEVANCE PETITION DATED 26.5.2022 PUT UP BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
12.7.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7THE TRUE COPY OF THE OTS OFFER LETTER FROM THE
RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED
17/12/2020
Exhibit P8THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH AN OFFER OF ONE-
TIME SETTLEMENT FOR AN ENHANCED AMOUNT SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED
13/7/2022

Eco Rubber v. the Kerala Financial Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eco Rubber v. the Kerala Financial Corporation

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

Shahad Parammal Vs the State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan Nair .C Vs Union of India

M/S. Air Travel Enterprises India Ltd., Vs Union of India

Baiju.S.Nair Vs State of Kerala

A.H.Hameedkutty, Vs State of Kerala

Maithri Charitable Trust Vs Government of India