Dismissed

S.Subramanian, v. Union Bank of India Represented by Its Authorized Officer

Kerala HC8 Jan 2024WP(C)/138/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Borrower sought quashing of possession notice by Advocate Commissioner and sale notice issued in SARFAESI enforcement after defaulting on earlier instalment directions. The court noted his ineligibility for the bank's SAMADHAN 2023 Scheme and dismissed the petition, permitting him to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petitioner at liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal; taking over of possession may be deferred if ₹5 lakhs remitted on or before 24.01.2024.

S.Subramanian, Vs Union Bank of India Represented by Its… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 18TH POUSHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 138 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

S.SUBRAMANIAN,
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O. S. SURYAMOORTHY, PUNARJANI,VETTUNGAL,
EAST KODUNGALLOOR,ALUVA, ERNAKULAM., PIN – 683102

¶7

BY ADVS.
E.V.MOLY
RANJAN BABU JOSEPH

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

UNION BANK OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER
ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, ERNAKULAM, 2ND FLOOR,
UNION BANK BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM,
KERALA, PIN – 682035

¶10

BY ADVS.
ASP.KURUP
SADCHITH.P.KURUP(K/1419/2002)
C.P.ANIL RAJ(K/872/2007)
SIVA SURESH(K/2688/2022)
RESHMA RAJ(K/1150/2021)

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

¶13

WP(C) No.138 of 2024

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 8^th day of January, 2024

¶16

The petitioner, who has availed a Cash Credit facility

¶17

from the respondent-Bank, has approached this Court seeking to quash Exts.P5 and P6.

¶18

Ext.P5 is a notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner appointed under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Ext.P6 is a Sale Notice issued by the Bank invoking Rule 8 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.

¶19

Going through the pleadings, it is seen that the petitioner has earlier approached this Court filing W.P.(C) No.1515/2022 and this Court directed the petitioner to clear the then existing outstanding amount of ₹38,07,257/- along with bank charges in 15 equated monthly instalments. Admittedly, the petitioner has not stuck to the time schedule prescribed by this Court.

¶20

¶21

WP(C) No.138 of 2024

¶22

As regards the application of the petitioner for

¶23

settlement of account under SAMADHAN 2023 Scheme, the respondent submits that the petitioner is not eligible for settlement under the said Scheme as the total outstanding due from the petitioner is less than ₹50 lakhs.

¶24

In the above facts of the case, I am not inclined to

¶25

grant any relief to the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. The petitioner will be at liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for any relief in this regard.

¶26

The petitioner states that the petitioner may be given a breathing time of two weeks to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the respondent may be directed not to take coercive proceedings for a limited period. If the petitioner remits an amount of ₹5 lakhs on or before 24.01.2024, taking over of possession may be deferred till 24.01.2024.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

spk

WP(C) No.138 of 2024

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 138/2024

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED ON
10.03.2022 IN WPC.NO.1515/2022
Exhibit P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE
DATED 03.07.2023 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
02.09.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P4THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE
DATED 19.09.2023 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit P5THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
29.11.2023 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER
Exhibit P6THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED
04.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
BANK
Exhibit P7THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAMADHAN SCHEME
ISSUED UNDER INSTRUCTION CIRCULAR
04359/2023 DATED 30.09.2023 BY THE
RESPONDENT BANK

S.Subramanian, v. Union Bank of India Represented by Its Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Subramanian, v. Union Bank of India Represented by Its Authorized 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

R. Sreekumaran Nair Vs State Bank of India

Naisam K.A. Vs the Kottayam Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd. NO.421

Chandramathy Amma Vs the Chief Manager

The South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs the Sub Registrar

Ismail P.P Vs District Collector

Sathy Devi Vs District Collector