Allowed

Muhammed Sadhakkathulla, v. the Authorized Officer, Kerala Bank

Kerala HC3 Jun 2022WP(C)/9208/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition against the Kerala Bank regarding a housing loan default, the Court allowed the petitioner an opportunity to clear the overdue amount in fifteen instalments. Upon repayment, the loan account will be regularised and coercive proceedings kept in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent bank to accept debt repayment in fifteen instalments with regularisation and suspension of coercive proceedings.

Muhammed Sadhakkathulla, Vs the Authorized Officer… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 9208 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MUHAMMED SADHAKKATHULLA, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. ABOOBACKER, KUZHIMANNIL HOUSE, CHEROOPA, KOZHIKODE 673 661.

¶8

BY ADVS. M.PROMODH KUMAR MAYA CHANDRAN ABIMALEK C VALSAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, KERALA BANK, REGIONAL OFFICER, KALLAYAR ROAD, CHALAPPURAM P.O KOZHIKODE 673 002.

¶11

2 THE MANAGER, KERALA BANK , MAVOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN (SC)

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P (C) No.9208/2022

-2-

J U D G M E N T

Petitioner has approached this Court challenging proceedings initiated 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 a loan availed by the petitioner.

¶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.29,74,112/-. 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 the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the situation now prevailing, apart from the submissions made as recorded above and considering the fact that this is a housing loan and also taking into account the fact that the petitioner has undertaken to clear off the overdue amount along with regular EMIs, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity to clear off the overdue amount in fifteen (15) equal instalments first of which shall be paid on or before 30-06-2022 and thereafter, if the amount so directed is repaid within the time as directed above, to have the loan account regularised.

¶23

W.P (C) No.9208/2022

¶24

-3-

¶25

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.29,74,112/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan account of the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶26

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.29,74,112/- together with any accrued interest and charges shall be repaid in fifteen equated monthly instalments.

¶27

(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 30-06-2022 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on the last working day of every succeeding month.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶32

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

AMG

W.P (C) No.9208/2022

-4-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9208/2022

¶37

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶38

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 02.02.2022.

Muhammed Sadhakkathulla, v. the Authorized Officer, Kerala Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Sadhakkathulla, v. the Authorized Officer, Kerala Bank

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

Lekshmi Mohan Vs the South Indian Bank Limited

Sreedevi S. Vs the Registrar

Sini Arakkal Vs Peoples Urban Bank Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sunil Kumar. S Vs the Authorised Officer

Sheeba C.S. Vs Indian Bank

Aboobacker.P., Vs the Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India