Kerala High Court
WP(C)/6974/2025 of JUBAINA SHAJI Vs THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER on 1 April 2025
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 6974 OF 2025 PETITIONER: JUBAINA SHAJI, AGED 59 YEARS, W/O SHAJI PARACKKAL, MUHAMMED KASIM, PARACKAL, KANJIRAPPALLY, ANAKKALLU, KOTTAYAM, PIN –
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 6974 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
JUBAINA SHAJI,
AGED 59 YEARS,
W/O SHAJI PARACKKAL, MUHAMMED KASIM, PARACKAL, KANJIRAPPALLY, ANAKKALLU, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686507.
BY ADVS.
SAJU J PANICKER
KURIAN K JOSE
RESPONDENT:
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, MAVELIKARA DIVISION, 1ST FLOOR, PADINJARETHALACKAL CHERIYAN CHAMBERS, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 690101.
BY ADVS.
SUNIL SHANKAR A
VIDYA GANGADHARAN(K/000424/2020)
SANDHRA.S(K/001610/2021)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
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
This is the 2nd round of litigation at the instance of the petitioner challenging the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. It is not disputed before me that if the petitioner were to pay in terms of the directions contained in Ext.P5 judgment in W.P(C)No.34562 of 2024, there is a default of a sum of Rs.6.03 lakhs as on today (after giving credit to the amounts already paid by the petitioner).
2. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that since this is the 2nd round of litigation at the instance of the petitioner, the Bank is not willing to consider the regularization of the loan account.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may be permitted to pay off the amount of Rs.6.03 lakhs in two instalments. It is submitted that the petitioner will continue to abide with the other conditions imposed in Ext.P5 judgment. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank and considering the fact that the petitioner has shown bona fides by remitting some amounts, purely as a matter of indulgence, I permit the petitioner to pay the amount of Rs.6.03 lakhs (defaulted instalments together with regular EMIs in terms of the judgment in W.P(C)No.34562 of 2024)together with any accrued interest, charges and costs in two equal monthly instalments payable on or before 21.04.2025 and 21.05.2025. The petitioner shall continue to pay the defaulted EMIs and regular EMIs in terms of the judgment in W.P(C)No.34562 of 2024 on the respective due dates without fail. That shall be in addition to the amounts payable by the petitioner on 21.04.2025 and 21.05.2025 as above. The writ petition will stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6974/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29.02.2024 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13 (2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT . Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF SALE DATED 3.09.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 5 LACS Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 5 LACS Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2024 IN WP (C) 34562 OF 2024 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF THE AMOUNTS TO THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF THE AMOUNTS TO THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 6.02.2025