Kerala High Court
WP(C)/35951/2019 of MANILAL KARTHIKEYAN, Vs THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., on 31 December 2019
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 10TH POUSHA, 1941 WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T) PETITIONER: MANILAL KARTHIKEYAN, AGED 44 YEARS S/O.K.M.KARTHIKEYAN, KURUPPASSERIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PUNNAKULAM, K.S.PURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 10TH POUSHA, 1941
WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
PETITIONER:
MANILAL KARTHIKEYAN,AGED 44 YEARSS/O.K.M.KARTHIKEYAN, KURUPPASSERIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PUNNAKULAM, K.S.PURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690 544.
BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL
RESPONDENTS:
SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON31.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner had availed a business loan from the second respondent bank. However, due to financial distress, the petitioner defaulted in repayment of the loan amount.The bank has initiated proceedings under the SARFAESIAct. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam hasappointed a Commissioner to take possession of theproperty by its order in M.C.No.810/2019. Ext.P1 is thenotice issued under Section 8(1) of the Security InterstRules, 2002. The petitioner seeks to pay off the entireoutstanding liability in equated monthly installments.
2. Heard. Sri. Sojan Micheal, the learned counsel forthe petitioner, Sri.Gilbert George Correya, the learnedStanding Counsel for the respondents.
3. I am conscious of the judicial pronouncementsby the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union Bank of India v.
I am conscious of the judicial pronouncements WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
Satyawati Tondon [(2010) 8 SCC 110] and that of thisCourt in Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore v.Mathew K.C. [ILR 2018 (1) KER 479] that this Court shouldbe slow in interfering with matters under the SARFAESI Actunder article 226 of the Constitution of India, in view of thealternate remedy provided under the enactment.
4. Considering the submissions made by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that he does not dispute theamount claimed by the respondents under the proceedingsinitiated against him, but only wants a breathing time topay off the entire outstanding amounts in instalments toregularize the loan account, notwithstanding the limitationof jurisdiction of this Court as observed in the aforesaiddecisions, I entertain this writ petition only for the purposeof granting the petitioner a breathing time to pay off theentire arrears towards the loan account in equated monthlyinstallments.
WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
5. The learned counsel for the respondents submitthat as on today an amount of Rs.7,64,513/- (Rupeesseven lakh sixty four thousand five hundred and thirteenonly) is due from the petitioner to the respondents. He alsosubmits that he bank is prepared to accept the outstandingamount in twelve equal monthly installments. The learnedcounsel for the petitioner prays for fifteen monthlyinstallments to pay off the entire outstanding amounts.
6. In view of the fact that the petitioner hasvolunteered to pay off the entire outstanding amounts inequated monthly installments and that if the petitioneravails the benefit of this judgment it would give a quietus tolitigation, I feel that some indulgence and leniency can beshown in favour of the petitioners.
Accordingly, in exercise of the jurisdiction of this Courtunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I dispose ofthis writ petition as follows:
WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
i.
The petitioner is directed to pay the over due amount of Rs.7,64,513/- as on today along withthe applicable charges and interest in twelvemonthly installments commencing from15.01.2020.
ii.
In addition to the above amount, the petitionershall also pay the regular equated monthlyinstallments as per the loan agreement and timeschedule fixed therein without fail.
iii. If the petitioner makes the aforesaid payment,the loan account shall be regularised and hewould be at liberty to service of the account asper the original terms of the sanctioned loanamount.
iv.
Conclusion
Needless to mention that, if the petitionercommits any default in payment of the amountas directed above, the benefit granted to thepetitioner by this judgment would stand vacatedand that the bank would be at liberty toresurrect the recovery proceedings and recoverthe entire liability from the petitioner. It is alsomake clear that the directions in the judgmentare peremptory in nature and the petitionershall comply with the same without committing WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
any default. No further request for extension ormodification of the judgment will be permittedunless in exceptional circumstances.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Nkr/31.12.2019
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS
JUDGE
WP(C).No.35951 OF 2019(T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 24/09/2019.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL