Kerala High Court
Mohammed Rafeeq T vs The Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd on 5 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14113 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED RAFEEQ T
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. THENU HAJI, THOOLIYATH HOUSE,
MANALAYA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.,
PIN - 679357
BY ADV K.RAKESH
RESPONDENT:
THE URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.,
PIN - 679322
BY ADVS.
JAYASREE K.P.
JOHN JOSEPH(K/000875/2019)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2024 The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made by the Urban Co-operative Bank Limited to the petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
2. The Bank paid ₹30 lakhs to the petitioner as Cash Credit facility in the year 2020. The petitioner states that though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of the financial advance, he could not pay the repayment installments promptly later due to extreme financial impediments. The repayment of advance fell into arrears. It happened due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.
WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024 3
3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly installments, the Bank authorities were not yielding. The authorities, instead started coercive proceedings invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and issued Ext.P1 notice.
4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to clear the overdue amounts towards the advance, if sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly installments. If the respondent is permitted to continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the petitioner, he will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Bank and denied all the statements made by the petitioner. On behalf of the respondent, it is submitted that the WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024 4 advance was given to the petitioner in the year 2020. The petitioner committed default in maintaining the advance.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and required him to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately omitted to do so. The petitioner's account was declared as NPA in the year 2021. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The impugned Ext.P1 notice was issued in these circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the Bank.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment soon and remit the outstanding amount immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024 5 petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioner as on 05.04.2024 is ₹50,26,951/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel representing the Bank.
9. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining the advance initially. The default in repayment of the advance occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. The petitioner has provided substantial security which will safeguard the interest of the Bank.
10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving a short and reasonable time to the petitioner to clear off the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions:
WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024 6
(i) The petitioner shall remit the outstanding amount of ₹50,26,951/- in ten consecutive and equal monthly installments along with accruing interest and other Bank charges, if any. First of such installments shall be paid on or before 06.05.2024.
(ii) If the petitioner commits default in making payments as directed above, the respondent will be at liberty to continue with the coercive proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law.
(iii) If the petitioner makes payments as directed above, coercive proceedings, if any, against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh WP(C) No.14113 Of 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14113/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21-12-
2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE C.J.M,
MANJERI IN M.C.NO.1003/2023
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION NOTICE
DATED, 11-3-2024 ISSUED BY THE
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER