IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
RAJITHA
AGED 51 YEARS
W/O. KARUNAN, EDAVALATH HOUSE,
VISHNUMANGALAM (P.O),
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,PIN-673 506
BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI)
RESPONDENT:
THE KERALA GRAMIN BANK
KALLACHI BRANCH, HEAD OFFICE IN MALAPPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER ,PIN-676 505
BY ADVS.
M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
K.JOHN MATHAI
JOSON MANAVALAN
KURYAN THOMAS
PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
RAJA KANNAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022 The petitioner, who has availed loans from the respondent-Kerala Gramin Bank, is before this Court seeking to command the respondent to permit the petitioner to pay off the entire liability in equal monthly instalments.
2. The petitioner states that she has availed loans granted by the respondent-Bank and due to extreme financial difficulties, the petitioner could not remit EMIs promptly. The petitioner had availed a loan of `5 lakhs. An immovable property is given as mortgage. Subsequently, two other loans amounting to `3,00,000/- and `1,00,000/- were also availed as agricultural loans by mortgaging petitioner's gold ornaments.
3. The petitioner states that the petitioner could not remit the instalments promptly due to acute financial problems. The respondent, thereupon, invoked proceedings under the WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022 3 provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The respondent has issued Ext.P1 notice threatening dispossession. The petitioner would submit that if the petitioner is given a breathing time, she can wipe off the entire liability in continuing instalments.
4. The learned Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondent and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. The petitioner had availed more than one loan and has deliberately defaulted in making repayments. The petitioner repeatedly was required to pay off the liabilities. The petitioner, however, did not pay the EMIs. In such circumstances, the respondent had no other way than to initiate proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Ext.P1 is legal and proper and is not liable to be set aside, contended the Standing Counsel.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022 4 respondent.
6. From the pleadings and arguments, it is discernible that the petitioner, who has availed loans from the respondent- Bank, has been making remittances at the initial stage. According to the petitioner, it is only because of extreme financial problems that is faced by her family that the amount could not be repaid promptly. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner should be permitted to clear the dues in instalments as directed below:
(1) The petitioner shall remit an amount of `2,00,000/-, within a period of one month from today.
(2) The balance amount along with accrued interest and other charges, if any, shall be paid by the petitioner in the subsequent ten consecutive equal monthly instalments. (3) If the petitioner remits the amount as directed above, the respondent shall defer coercive proceedings, if any, WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022 5 against the petitioner and her sureties. (4) If the petitioner commits default in making any of the remittances as directed above, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1509/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.12.2021 RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL