Ashok Kumar vs Canara Bank

Kerala High Court

Ashok Kumar vs Canara Bank on 29 June, 2022

                 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. 20902 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              ASHOK KUMAR
              PROPRIETOR, RAM STORES, PULLICHODE, III/139A,
              KADAKKARAPPALLY P.O, CHERTHALA SOUTH, ALAPPUZHA - 699551.
              BY ADV C.A.RAJEEV


RESPONDENTS:

     1        CANARA BANK
              CHERTHALA BRANCH, EAST OF MANORAMA JUNCTION, CHERTHALA,
              ALAPPUZHA - 689123, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
     2        THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
              CANARA BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, BOAT JETTY ROAD,
              ALAPPUZHA - 688011.


              SRI. M. GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20902 OF 2022

                                2




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022 The petitioner, who is the Proprietor of a trading concern, has approached this Court seeking to direct the respondents to issue a statement of account pertaining to the loan availed by the petitioner and to re-schedule the repayment of the term loan availed by him.

2. The petitioner states that he has availed an Over Draft facility of `10 lakhs from the Syndicate Bank. The Syndicate Bank merged with the 1st respondent-Canara Bank subsequently. In 2019, the Canara Bank converted the Over Draft facility availed by the petitioner to a term loan of `10 lakhs. The loan was to be repaid in 120 equal monthly instalments of `13,598/-, commencing from June, 2019. The petitioner has time upto March, 2029 to clear the loan instalments.

3. Now, the respondents have initiated coercive proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of WP(C) NO. 20902 OF 2022 3 Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the property pledged by the petitioner. Though the petitioner has raised many grounds questioning the legality of the proceedings taken by the respondents, the petitioner at the time of hearing, urged that if the petitioner is given sufficient time to clear off the outstanding arrears in instalments, the petitioner can clear the entire liability.

3. Standing Counsel for respondents entered appearance and resisted the arguments raised by the petitioner. The Standing Counsel controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. It was pointed out that the overdue amount is `3,04,500/-. If the petitioner makes a substantial amount now, a very short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner for clearing the outstanding arrears, contended the Standing Counsel.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the WP(C) NO. 20902 OF 2022 4 respondents.

5. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is running a proprietary concern and his Over Draft facility has been made into a term loan only in June, 2019 and also taking into consideration the fact that the period of repayment will end only in March, 2029, this Court is of the view that a short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner for clearing the outstanding amount.

6. In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

(1) The petitioner shall pay an amount of `50,000/- within a period of one month and balance amount in nine consecutive equal monthly instalments commencing immediately thereafter.

(2) The petitioner shall pay the outstanding arrears along with accruing interest and other dues, if any, and shall also pay promptly, the regular Equated Monthly Instalments. (3) If the petitioner makes the payments as directed above, WP(C) NO. 20902 OF 2022 5 the respondents will defer all coercive proceedings against the petitioner and his sureties.

(4) If the petitioner commits default in repaying the outstanding arrears as directed above, the respondents will be free to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Sd/-

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 5.1.2022 OF THE CJM, ALAPPUZHA IN M.C. 19/2022.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 16.06.2022 OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY PLAINT DATED 7.4.2022 IN C.S.

129/2022 FILED BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT, ALAPPUZHA.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL