Ameena Thaha Koya vs Chief Manager And Authorized Officer, ...

Kerala High Court

Ameena Thaha Koya vs Chief Manager And Authorized Officer, ... on 21 May, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
      TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          AMEENA THAHA KOYA
          AGED 42 YEARS
          D/O ABUSA BEEVI, PROPRIETRIX, M/S. AS INDUSTRIES, HAIL
          VILLA, VADAKKEVILA.P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691010.

          BY ADVS.
          R.T.PRADEEP
          P.BIJIMON
          M.BINDUDAS
          ABIN P. SHAJU
          SURAJ S. KUMAR
          NIRANJAN T. PRADEEP


RESPONDENT:

          CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER, UCO BANK
          KOLLAM BRANCH, FIRST FLOOR, KHAISE BUILDING, BEACH
          ROAD, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001.

          SRI.DEEPAK JOY, SC
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024               2


                                  JUDGMENT

Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024 The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of 7.95 Ares of land in Survey No.340/25 and 23 in Block No.24 of Vadakkevila Village with a single storeyed residential building having a production unit of rice powder, chilli powder and coriander powder under the name and style 'AS Industries'. The residential building as well as the production unit are placed in the same building and the petitioner along with her family is residing therein.

2. The petitioner availed a Cash Credit loan from the respondent - Bank for a sum of Rs.80 lakhs by mortgaging the property of the petitioner, on 01.02.2018. Since the petitioner was promptly paying the interest, the Cash Credit facility was extended for a further period of one year. She was also granted a Term Loan of Rs.3 lakhs on 28.02.2019.

3. Due to some unforeseen circumstances including Covid - 19 pandemic, the petitioner was unable to repay the loan and now she has been served with sale notices. The Bank is WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024 3 ready for One Time Settlement for Rs.95 lakhs. It is in the above circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking to grant six months' time to materialise the private sale of secured asset and to honour the One Time Settlement by payment of Rs.95 lakhs by keeping in abeyance proceedings pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4.

4. Heard.

5. In effect, the petitioner seeks to vary the terms of the alleged One Time Settlement where the petitioner intends to pay Rs.10 lakhs right now and balance of Rs.85 lakhs within six months.

6. The Standing Counsel submits that there is no One Time Settlement agreed to by the Bank and the petitioner has to pay the entire outstanding amount. Unless the entire amount is paid, possession of the property cannot be restored.

7. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the Bank.

8. As regards grant of six months' time for the petitioner to adhere to the One Time Settlement proposal, firstly the Bank WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024 4 disputes existence of any such One Time Settlement agreed to by the Bank. Secondly, even if there is a One Time Settlement, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held in the judgment in State Bank of India v. Arvindra Electronics Private Limited [(2023) 1 SCC 540] that this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot unilaterally change the terms of a One Time Settlement arrived into between the customer and the Bank.

9. Further relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition is to quash Exts.P3 and P4. Exts.P3 and P4 are proceedings issued by the Bank in exercise of the powers under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner has an effective alternative remedy for challenging Exts.P3 and P4 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. For all the above reasons, I find no merit in the writ petition. The petitioner will be at liberty to approach the Bank for any further re-arrangement/settlement of the loan account.

10. The respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to remove the apparels, study materials of school going children WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024 5 and household utensils in the presence of authorised officers of the Bank and the Advocate Commissioner. The respondent will be at liberty to avail police assistance, if found, necessary.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE Sru WP(C) NO. 18253 OF 2024 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18253/2024 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF DISCHARGE SUMMARY OF HUSBAND OF PETITIONER NAMELY SUJATYDHEEN (HOSPITAL NO.L- 00116593) FOR THE TREATMENT FROM 15.11.2022 TO 30.11.2022 ISSUED FROM TRAVANCORE MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 21.12.2023 AS REGARD TAKING PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF SECURED ASSET ON 9.1.2024 WHICH IS ISSUED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER TO PETITIONER.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 12.4.2024 BY SCHEDULING THE AUCTION SALE ON 28.5.2024 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 13.5.2024 OF TAKING PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF SECURED ASSET ON 21.5.2024 AT 2 P.M. BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER TO PETITIONER.