IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 5290 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
U. S. ABHILASH,
AGED 46 YEARS
(PROPRIETOR NIYA SUPERMARKET), S/O. LATE P.K.
UPENDRAN, PATTEKKATTU HOUSE, NJARAKULANGARA,
MANNANCHERRY P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688538.
BY ADV GOKUL DAS V.V.H.
RESPONDENTS:
1 AUTHORISED OFFICER,
THE CHIEF MANAGER (AUTHORIZED OFFICER), STATE
BANK OF INDIA, RASMEC ALAPPUZHA, 1ST FLOOR,
KALLUPALATHIL BUILDING, CSB ROAD, IRON BRIDGE
P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688012.
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER,
STATE BANK OF INDIA, PATHIRAPPALLY BRANCH, P.B.
NO. 1, PATHIRAPPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688521.
BY ADVS.
PREETHI. P.V.
M.V.BALAGOPAL
DEEPA NARAYANAN
T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.)
ADV. JITHESH MENON, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.5290/2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022 The petitioner, who is running a Supermarket at Kalavoor in Alappuzha District, is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P1 and Ext.P2 notices.
2. The petitioner states that he is running a Supermarket and for the business, he availed a term loan facility of Rs.17 lakhs from the 2 nd respondent on 13.08.2018. The loan was secured by pledging a property having an extent of 8.09 Ares along with a residential building thereon. Due to Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent financial distress, the Supermarket run by the petitioner suffered substantial losses. Consequently, the loan amount could not be repaid to the respondent-Bank.
3. The petitioner states that the respondents thereafter initiated coercive proceedings invoking the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and now the 1st respondent is taking hasty steps to move the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Alappuzha invoking Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, for taking over W.P.(C) No.5290/2022 3 vacant possession of the building.
4. The petitioner states that there is no deliberate default on his part in making repayment of loan amount and the repayments were defaulted for reasons absolutely beyond the control of the petitioner. If the petitioner is granted a breathing time to repay the amount, he will be able to clear the entire loan account. The respondents are now trying to takeover the possession of his residential building.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. Standing Counsel submits that in spite of repeated notices to the petitioner, he did not care to settle the loan account. Consequently, the loan account was declared as NPA. The respondents have invoked SARFAESI proceedings and acted only in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The writ petition is not maintainable, contended the learned Standing Counsel. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that if the petitioner is ready to remit the entire outstanding amount, he can be given a very short breathing time.
W.P.(C) No.5290/2022 4
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
7. The petitioner had taken the loan in the year 2018. The loan amount was Rs.17 lakhs. Due to Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner's Supermarket suffered huge losses as in the case of other businesses. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner is now before this Court, seeking time for repayment of loan amount.
8. In view of the facts urged in the Court and the pleadings in the writ petition, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may be granted reasonable time to clear off the entire liability.
9. In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(1) The petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000 (Rupees Three lakhs only) within a period of two weeks from today.
(2) The balance amount payable by the petitioner along with accruing interest and all other charges, shall be paid in 12 equal consecutive monthly instalments thereafter.
W.P.(C) No.5290/2022 5 (3) If the petitioner remits the payments as directed above, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner and the sureties shall stand deferred.
(4) If the petitioner commits any default in making the payments as directed, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE AJ W.P.(C) No.5290/2022 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5290/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 04/02/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT READ WITH RULE 8 OF THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES, 2002.