Disposed

Subramanian v. Special Sales Officer

Kerala HC15 Mar 2023WP(C)/2902/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam allowed a writ petition filed by a bank customer facing property sale proceedings due to loan default. The court directed the bank to accept repayment of the specific overdue amount in ten equated monthly installments, keeping coercive proceedings in abeyance pending clearances. Dismissed, not applicable. Disposition: Other. Quality: Thin.

What did the court decide?

Direction to accept overdue loan amount in ten equated monthly installments; coercive proceedings kept in abeyance.

Subramanian Vs Special Sales Officer — Money Laundering | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 15^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 2902 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

SUBRAMANIAN AGED 63 YEARS PULLINKUZHI VEEDU S/O CHATHUNNI, NADATHARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680751

¶7

BY ADV M.R.SASITH

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 SPECIAL SALES OFFICER THE THRISSUR CO OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO 328 ,329 POST OFFICE ROAD, MARKET JUNCTION, PANANCHAKAM COLONY, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR, PIN 680651, PIN - 680651

¶10

2 THE MANAGER THE THRISSUR CO OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO 328 AND 329 POST OFFICE ROAD, MARKET JUNCTION PANANCHAKAM COLONY MANNUTHY THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 BY ADVS. ADV. VENUGOPAL.M.R DHANYA P.ASHOKAN(K/001671/2000)

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P (C) No.2902/2023

-2-

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner availed several credit facilities from the respondent bank. On default being committed, proceedings have been taken against the petitioner under the provisions of the Kerala State Co-operative (Agricultural and Rural Development Banks) Act, 1984. The property of the petitioner was brought to sale, prompting the petitioner to approach this court.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to clear the liability in installments. It is submitted that the condition imposed in the interim order dated 27-01-2023 has been complied with.

¶17

The learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that the overdue amount as on 08-02-2023 in respect of all the loans put together is Rs.3,26,839/-. It is submitted that some reasonable installments can be granted to the petitioner to clear the liability.

¶18

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the overdue amount in respect of all the loans of Rs.3,26,839/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan accounts of the petitioner on the following conditions:

¶19

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.3,26,839/- together with any accrued interest / bank charges shall be repaid in ten (1o) equated monthly instalments.

¶20

(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 10-04-2023 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before 10^th day of every succeeding month.

¶21

W.P (C) No.2902/2023

¶22

-3-

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶27

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

AMG

W.P (C) No.2902/2023

-4-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2902/2023

¶32

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶33

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 24/12/2022

Subramanian v. Special Sales Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanian v. Special Sales Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahin.K., Vs the Authorized Officer

Ajesh Damodaran Vs Ithithanam Service Co-Operative Bank

Aswathy Raj Vs Ithithanam Service Co-Operative Bank

T.M. Abdul Rahoof Vs State of Kerala

Niyas.P.P Vs the Anjarakkandi Farmers Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Thomas, Vs the District Collector