Disposed

Lemin Lawrence, v. Authorised Officer

Kerala HC13 Jun 2023WP(C)/652/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging coercive proceedings under the SARFAESI Act was disposed of. The Court permitted the petitioner to pay the overdue loan amount in ten monthly instalments and directed the respondents to defer further coercive actions.

What did the court decide?

The respondents are directed to defer coercive proceedings and permitted the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in ten equated monthly instalments from 13.07.2023.

Lemin Lawrence, Vs Authorised Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 652 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

1LEMIN LAWRENCE,
EDAKKALATHUR HOUSE, ANJUR P.O MUNDUR,
THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN - 680541
BY ADVS.
RENJITH B.MARAR
LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL
ARUN POOMULLI
PREETHA S CHANDRAN
ABHIJITH SREEKUMAR
JOSEPH KIRAN D. THEKKEKARA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1AUTHORISED OFFICER,
DHANLAXMI BANK, THRISSUR REGION-REGIONAL OFFICE,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680002
2THE MANAGER,
DHANLAXMI BANK LTD,HIGH ROAD BRANCH,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680001
BY ADVS.
VIVEK VARGHESE P.J.
SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J., SC, DHANLAXMI BANK
VARUGHESE M EASO

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WPC No.652 of 2023

¶12

¶13

C.S.DIAS, J.

¶14

W.P.(C.) No.652 of 2023

¶15

Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2023

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay off the overdue amounts in instalments.

¶18

The petitioner's case is that, he had availed a Kissan Cash Credit Facility from the respondent bank for Rs.1.5 crores by creating an equitable mortgage. Due to Covid-19 pandemic, he could not pay the instalments on time. The respondents have now proceeded against the secured asset under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (in short, ‘Act’). The petitioner is prepared to pay off the overdue amount in

¶19

¶20

WPC No.652 of 2023

¶21

instalments. Hence, the writ petition.

¶22

When the writ petition came up for consideration, this Court by interim orders, directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.48/- lakh to consider his prayer to pay the overdue amount in instalments.

¶23

Today, when the writ petition was taken up for consideration, Sri.Vivek Varghese P.J., on instructions, submitted that, the petitioner has complied with the conditional interim orders passed by this Court. However, as on today, the overdue amount is Rs.1.24/Crore. The respondents are willing to permit the petitioner to pay off the above overdue amount in ten equated monthly instalments. The said submission is recorded.

¶24

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready to accept the above offer.

¶25

¶26

WPC No.652 of 2023

¶27

Having considered the pleadings and

¶28

materials on record and the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, to provide the petitioner one last opportunity to pay off the loan amount, I am inclined to exercise the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dispose of the writ petition.

¶29

Resultantly, I dispose of the writ petition in the following manner:

¶30

(i) The respondents are directed to defer further coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P12 notice, to enable the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in instalments.

¶31

(ii) The petitioner is permitted to pay the overdue amount as state above with future interest and cost to the respondent bank in ten equated monthly instalments commencing from 13.07.2023, along with regular EMIs.

¶32

WPC No.652 of 2023

¶33

¶34

(iii) Needless to mention, if the petitioner

¶35

commits default of the condition ordered above,

¶36

he would lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondents would be at liberty to proceed with recovery proceedings from the stage it presently stands.

¶37

(iv) It is made clear that, no further application for modification/extension of time shall be entertained.

Sd/-

C. S. DIAS

JUDGE

SKP/13-06

WPC No.652 of 2023

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 652/2023

¶45

`PETITIO`	`NER’S EXHI`	`BITS:`
`EXHIBIT`	`P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 27.03.2021`
`EXHIBIT`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY OF EXIT REVIEW AGREEMENT DATED` `18.06.2021`
`EXHIBIT`	`P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.06.2021` `PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND` `RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT`	`P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.08.2021`
`EXHIBIT`	`P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL DATED 28.09.2021` `ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE CREDIT OFFICER` `OF DHANLAXMI BANK`
`EXHIBIT`	`P6`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE` `PETITIONER FROM 1.04.2020 TO 31.03.2021`
`EXHIBIT`	`P7`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE` `PETITIONER FROM 1.04.2021 TO 25.03.2022`
`EXHIBIT`	`P8`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE` `PETITIONER FROM 1.03.2022 TO 31.03.2022`
`EXHIBIT`	`P9`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE` `PETITIONER FROM 1.04.2022 TO 31.12.2022`
`EXHIBIT`	`P10`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE RECALL NOTICE DATED` `6.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT`	`P11`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.10.2022` `PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT`
`EXHIBIT`	`P12`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.11.2022` `UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT`
`EXHIBIT`	`P13`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE` `PETITIONER DATED 26.12.2022`

¶46

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶47

TRUE COPY

¶48

P.A. TO JUDGE

Lemin Lawrence, v. Authorised Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lemin Lawrence, v. Authorised 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

Santhakumar Vs Muthoot Vehicle and Asset Finance Ltd.

Mathew Cyriac, Vs the Manager

Gireesh Kumar.E, Vs State of Kerala

Puliyilethu Distributors, Vs Authorised Officer, South Indian Bank

Rajeev Bhaskara Warrier, Vs the Authorized Officer

Nazimudeen a Vs Hdfc Bank Limited