Allowed

Maniyammal v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Kerala HC5 Jan 2022WP(C)/98/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a writ petition filed by borrowers facing loan recovery proceedings, directed the respondent bank to accept repayment of the overdue amount in 6 instalments, keep coercive proceedings in abeyance, and regularise the account upon successful repayment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent bank to accept repayment of overdue amount in 6 monthly instalments, keep coercive proceedings in abeyance, and regularise loan account on full repayment.

Maniyammal Vs Housing Development Finance Corporation… — 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

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 15TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 98 OF 2022

PETITIONERS :

1 MANIYAMMAL,

AGED 57 YEARS,

W/O. K. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHEMBAKKARA P. O., KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM - 686 540.

¶10

2 KRISHNAKUMAR R., AGED 31 YEARS,

¶11

S/O. K. P. RADHAKRISHNAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHEMBAKKARA P. O., KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM - 686 540.

¶12

BY ADV CHITHRA CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶13

RESPONDENT :

¶14

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, HDFC HOUSE, POST BAG NO.1667, RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, M. G. ROAD, KOCHI - 682 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.

¶15

BY ADV.S.AMBILY,SC

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 98 OF 2022

¶18

¶19

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶20

Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2022

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Petitioners as borrowers from the respondent bank, have committed default in repayment. Consequently, proceedings have been initiated by the bank for recovery of the amounts due.

¶23

During the course of hearing, petitioners have confined the relief to an opportunity for repaying the overdue amount in instalments and to obtain regularisation of the loan account.

¶24

It was submitted on behalf of the respondent bank that the petitioners committed default in repayment and the overdue amount is Rs.1,85,000/-. 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.

¶25

I have heard Smt.Chithra Chandrasekharan, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Smt.S.Ambily, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶26

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 petitioners can be granted an opportunity

¶27

WP(C) NO. 98 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

to repay the overdue amount in '6' instalments and thereafter, if the amount so directed is repaid within the time as directed above, to have the loan account regularised.

¶30

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank

¶31

to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.1,85,000/- along with bank charges from the petitioners and regularise the loan account of the petitioners on the following conditions :

¶32

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.1,85,000/- shall be repaid in '6' equated monthly instalments.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶40

RKM

¶41

WP(C) NO. 98 OF 2022

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 98/2022

¶44

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶45

Exhibit P1 DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 19.10.2021 TO THE PETITIONER.

¶46

Exhibit P2 OBJECTION/REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 14.12.2021 BEFORE THE RESPONDENT BANK.

¶47

Exhibit P3 REPLY GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT BANK REJECTING THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 22.12.2021.

Maniyammal v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maniyammal v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

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

National Radio Electronics Corporation Vs State Tax Officer (Intelligence)

Shylesh K. Vs the Authorized Officer, Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Jose M Panikkulam Vs Irinjalakkuda Town Co-Operative Bank

Gmmco Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

Cynosure Power Systems Vs Assistant Commissioner (Works Contract)

Lee Builders Vs the State Tax Officer