Allowed

Paul Joseph v. Special Sale Officer

Kerala HC6 Feb 2024WP(C)/1128/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A plantation worker who defaulted on a Rs.15 lakh loan from a co-operative bank sought breathing time to repay after receiving a recovery notice. The court ordered the petition, directing the bank to state the outstanding dues and permitting repayment in eighteen equal monthly installments, with coercive recovery kept in abeyance if payments are diligent.

What the court decided

AI extract

Paul Joseph Vs Special Sale Officer — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICERAJAVIJAYARAGHAVANV
TUESDAY,THE6THDAYOFFEBRUARY2024/17THMAGHA,1945
WP(C)NO.1128OF2024

¶3

PETITIONER/S:

¶4

PAULJOSEPH
AGED47YEARS
S/OJOSEPH,PARACKALHOUSE,NJEEZHOOR,KOTTAYAM,
PIN-686612.
BYADVS.
S.MOHAMMEDALRAFI
THAJUNAMARIAFRANCIS

¶5

RESPONDENT/S:

¶6

1SPECIALSALEOFFICER
NJEEZHOORSCBGROUP,VAIKOMSAHAKARANASANGAM,ASSISTANT
REGISTRAR(GENERAL)OFFICE,VAIKOM,PIN-686141.

¶7

2NEEZHOORSERVICECO-OPERATIVEBANKLTD,NO.K-136
REPRESENTEDBYASSISTANTSECRETARY,NEEZHOOR
BRANCH,NEEZHOORP.O,KOTTAYAM,PIN-686612.
BYADVM.G.KARTHIKEYAN

¶8

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
06.02.2024,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶9

WP(C)NO.1128OF2024

¶10

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

The petitioner is a plantation worker. He is stated to have availed a loan for a sum of Rs.15 lakhs in the year 2015 from the 2nd respondent Bank. By way of collateral, the immovable property owned by the petitioner was mortgaged. The petitioner states that as a direct consequence of the pandemic, the petitioner suffered financial setbacks, and he could not make the loan repayments on time. When default was committed, the Bank initiated proceedings to recover the amounts, and he has now been served with Ext.P1 recovery notice. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioner is before this Court seeking issuance of directions to the Bank to grant the petitioner breathing time to clear the outstanding.

¶13

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the loan was availed in the year 2015, and the total outstanding as of the date is Rs.24,91,305/-. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent is not averse to granting the petitioner an opportunity to clear the outstanding. However, he submits that not more than ten installments be granted.

¶14

Upon careful consideration of the submissions made by both parties, it is evident that the petitioner owes in excess of Rs.24 lakhs to the 2nd respondent Bank. The respondents, very fairly, have agreed to permit the petitioner to settle these debts through a limited number of installments. As a measure of last resort, I am inclined to issue directions

¶15

WP(C)NO.1128OF2024

¶16

¶17

to facilitate the petitioner in discharging his financial obligations to the 2nd

¶18

respondent. This approach is deemed necessary to provide a structured pathway for the petitioner to clear off his monetary liabilities in a manageable manner.

¶19

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered, and the following directions are issued:

¶20

(i) The petitioner shall approach the 2nd respondent with a request to inform him of the details of the outstanding amount together with interest and other charges due from him in respect of the loan account. If such a request is made within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the 2nd respondent shall forthwith issue a statement in writing detailing the amounts due.

¶21

(ii) On receipt of such a statement, the petitioner shall pay the amounts shown therein in eighteen (18) equal monthly installments. The first of which shall be payable on 15.3.2024 , and the balance shall be paid on the 1st of every succeeding month.

¶22

(iii) If the amounts are diligently paid in terms of the directions above, coercive proceedings initiated against him by the respondents for the realization of the amount shall be kept in abeyance.

¶23

(iv) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits default of any two installments, he will lose the benefit of this judgment, and the concerned respondents will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against him from the stage at which he presently stands and recover the entire

¶24

WP(C)NO.1128OF2024

¶25

¶26

amount along with interest and other charges.

¶27

(v) It is further made clear that no application for an

¶28

extension of time will be entertained.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶31

Sru

¶32

WP(C)NO.1128OF20245

¶33

APPENDIXOFWP(C)1128/2024

¶34

PETITIONEREXHIBITS
ExhibitP1TRUECOPYOFTHENOTICEDATED04/01/2024ISSUED
BYTHE1STRESPONDENT

Paul Joseph v. Special Sale Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Paul Joseph v. Special Sale Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Rahiman T. Vs Sethu Kumar

Reena K.A Vs the Vazhakulam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Bhavani Balachandra Das M.C Vs the Secretary

Mani Pampanal Alias Janardhanan Pampanal Vs State of Kerala

T. S. Kurian Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil P D Vs State of Kerala