Disposed

Kamal Kumar v. Authorised Officer, LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Feb 2011CWP/2030/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking quashing of SFAESI action under Section 13(2) & (4). Court directed Respondent to provide statement of default amount with interest. Upon deposit within three months and regular EMI payment, action under 2002 Act to be kept in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to inform default amount with interest; upon payment, action under 2002 Act to be stayed.

Kamal Kumar Vs Authorised Officer, LIC… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

C.W.P. No. 2030 of 2009 . [O&M] Date of Decision: 14^th February, 2011 .

¶3

Kamal Kumar

¶4

Petitioner through Mr. P.S.Khurana, Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

Authorized Officer, LIC Housing Finance Limited Respondents through Mr.O.P.Narang, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶10

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶11

SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL]

¶12

The petitioner seeks quashing of the action initiated by the LIC Housing Finance Limited under Section 13[2] and 13[4] of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

¶13

On 10.02.2009 when the case came up for preliminary hearing, the petitioner made a statement that he was ready and willing to pay `35,000/- within one month and the balance amount in two monthly equal installments. The petitioner further undertook to pay the EMIs regularly. Subject to the compliance of that undertaking, the petitioner's dispossession was stayed. The interim stay order was later on vacated on 28.01.2010 as the petitioner was said to have defaulted in the payment of the installments.

¶14

It is stated by learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has yet not paid the defaulted amount.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping these proceedings pending. Suffice it to direct that the respondent – LIC Housing Housing Finance Limited shall inform the petitioner the amount in default as on 31.01.2011 along with interest as per the agreed terms and conditions. The petitioner shall deposit the amount in default along with interest within three months from the date of receipt of such statement and shall keep on paying the future installments regularly. If he does so, action under the 2002 Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, in case of default, the respondent shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶16

Disposed of. Dasti .

¶17

February 14, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE

Kamal Kumar v. Authorised Officer, LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Kumar v. Authorised Officer, LIC Housing Finance Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiranbir Singh Kang Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Pavittar Singh etc. Vs State of Pb.

Dharam Singh Kang and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Ramanpreet Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jasbir Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Prit Pal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.