Dismissing a writ petition, the Court held that the remedy for the regularisation of a non-performing loan account lies with the Debt Recovery Tribunal, not this Court under Article 226.
Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to agitate contentions before the appropriate forum (Debt Recovery Tribunal).
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 12TH MAGHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 218 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
MOHAN KRISHNA AGED 42 YEARS S/O KUMARAN , NEDUMTHOTTLYIL HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EREANADU THALUK, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM , PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NEDUMTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678582
BY ADV SRI K.A.SREEJITH
RESPONDENTS:
1 AUTHORIISED OFFICER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, DNO 733/2,1ST FLOOR PALAKKAD D&D ARCADE, BUILDING , CHITTUR ROAD, MANPPULLIKKAVU, KUNNATHUR MEDU, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678013 2 THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD MELAMURI , PALLIPURAM , PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 678006 BY ADVS. SUNIL SANKAR.P. P.A.AUGUSTINE AREEKATTEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No. 218/2023
2
T.R. RAVI, J.
-------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.218 of 2023
Dated this the 1st day of February, 2023
JUDGMENT
Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the respondents.
2 . The only prayer in the writ petition is for regularisation
of the loan account of the petitioner in a time bound period.
3 . A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents.
The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.73 lakhs along with one Abdul Rahman. The loan account became a Non Performing Asset on 19.5.2021. A notice under section 32 of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 7.7.2021. On 6.5.2022, symbolic possession of the residential building and physical possession of vacant land which had been mortgaged had been taken and on 17.6.2022, the respondents had issued redemption notice. The amount outstanding as on 4.1.2023 was Rs.95,10,485/-. In the above circumstances, the counsel for the respondent submitted that there is no scope for any regularisation of the account.
4 . I find justification in the submission made by the counsel for the respondents. The remedy for the petitioner is to
W.P.(C)No. 218/2023
3
approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal for reliefs and it may not be possible for this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in a fact situation that is borne out.
The writ petition is hence dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to agitate his contentions before the appropriate forum.
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI
JUDGE
dsn
W.P.(C)No. 218/2023
4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 218/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER TO THE PETITIONER DATED 23.12.2022
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 to regularise a loan account declared as a Non Performing Asset.
Whether the petitioner must approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal instead for reliefs regarding the loan account regularisation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
MOHAN KRISHNA
AUTHORISED OFFICER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
T.R. RAVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
