Kerala High Court
Shaly.C.S vs Canara Bank on 12 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 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 15368 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
SHALY.C.S,
AGED 52 YEARS
NAKSHATRA, PVN E24,
PILLA VEEDU NAGAR,
KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004.
BY ADVS.
C.S.MANILAL
S.NIDHEESH
RESPONDENT:
CANARA BANK,
NALANCHIRA BRANCH,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN - 695005
REP. BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
BY ADVS.
GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR M
K.JOHN MATHAI
JOSON MANAVALAN
KURYAN THOMAS
PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
RAJA KANNAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.15368 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12th day of April, 2024 The petitioner, who has availed a financial advance from the respondent-Bank and against whom proceedings are initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash Ext.P1 and to direct the respondent to consider Ext.P5 and grant three months time for paying the settlement amount.
2. Heard.
3. The pleadings in the writ petition would indicate that by Ext.P2, the petitioner was offered a One Time Settlement under which the petitioner was to pay ₹3,20,000/- on or before 19.01.2024, ₹4,30,000/- on or before 24.02.2024 and ₹8,50,000/- on or before 18.04.2024. W.P.(C)No.15368 of 2024 :3:
4. It is an admitted position that the petitioner has remitted only ₹3,20,000/- which is the first instalment. The petitioner states that the petitioner's husband is suffering from serious medical issues and unless three months time is granted to the petitioner to honour the One Time Settlement, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court has considered the issue of varying conditions of One Time Settlement between the Bank and the borrower in the judgment in State Bank of India v. Arvindra Electronics Private Limited [(2023) 1 SCC 540] and has held that the High Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 cannot enlarge or vary the conditions of any One Time Settlement entered into by a Bank with its borrower.
6. In view of the law laid down by the the Hon'ble Apex Court, the petitioner will have to approach the Bank W.P.(C)No.15368 of 2024 :4: itself for any further relief / rearrangement of loan.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the Bank with appropriate representation for any variation in the One Time Settlement agreement.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams W.P.(C)No.15368 of 2024 :5: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15368/2024 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 3.1.2024 OF TAKING POSSESSION Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT LETTER DATED 19.1.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT ISSUED BY KERALA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE (KIMS) DATED 28.5.2015 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT DATED 26.4.2023 ISSUED BY KIMS HEALTH Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 7.4.2024