Disposed

Dinesh Nair v. Hdfc Ltd.

Kerala HC11 Jan 2022WP(C)/710/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted the petitioner an opportunity to repay the entire defaulted bank dues in five equated monthly instalments provided they continue regular EMIs, keeping coercive proceedings in abeyance until the amount is cleared.

What did the court decide?

The respondent bank directed to accept repayment of overdue amount Rs.6,69,755/- in 5 equated monthly instalments, regularise the account, keep coercive proceedings in abeyance, and return possession

Dinesh Nair Vs Hdfc 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
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943

¶4

WP(C) NO. 710 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

DINESH NAIR
AGED 40 YEARS
SREE SABAREESAM, NEAR YAKSHI AMMAN KOVIL,
VANDITTADAM, VELLAYANI PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695522

¶7

BY ADVS.
E.M.MURUGAN
P.R.PRATEESH
P.RAKESH (VAIKOM)
K.R.LEKSHMI

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

HDFC LTD
HDFC HOUSE, POST BAG NO 1667, RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, MG
ROAD, KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682015

¶10

BY ADVS.
K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.)
S.AMBILY
MICKY THOMAS

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 710 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶15

W.P.(C) No. 710 of 2022

¶16

Dated this the 11^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.6,69,755/-. 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

I have heard Sri. E. M. Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri. K.K.Chandran Pillai, the learned Senior counsel

¶22

WP(C) NO. 710 OF 2022

¶23

¶24

for the respondent.

¶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 ‘5’ 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

¶27

accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.6,69,755/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan account of the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶28

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.6,69,755/- shall be repaid in ‘5’ equated monthly instalments.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

WP(C) NO. 710 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

(vi) Since it is submitted that the possession of the flat has already been taken over by the respondent bank, the same shall be returned to the petitioner on completion of the entire defaulted amount along with regular EMI’s.

¶36

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶39

AJM

¶40

WP(C) NO. 710 OF 2022

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 710/2022

¶43

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶44

EXHIBIT P1POSSESSION NOTICE AND COVERING LETTER
DATED 12.11.2021
EXHIBIT P2NOTICE DATED 12.11.2021 UNDER RULE 8(6)

¶45

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS :NIL

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

PA TO JUDGE

Dinesh Nair v. Hdfc Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Nair v. Hdfc 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

Muhammed Rafi Vs Hdb Financial Services Ltd.

Shanoj a.H, Vs Canfin Homes Ltd.

Babu Cherian Vs Union of India

Shri.Jacob Pulickal George Vs the Income Tax Officer

Radha.B Vs Authorised Officer

M/S. Krishna Holiday Village Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) IV