Bipin S.K vs The Area Manager And Authorised Officer

Kerala High Court

Bipin S.K vs The Area Manager And Authorised Officer on 22 May, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
                  WP(C) NO. 18255 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

    1    BIPIN S.K., AGED 39 YEARS
         S/O. SASIDHARAN P, KAIRALI NIVAS, THEVANNOOR P.O.
         ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM,
         PIN - 691533
    2    KAIRALI S., AGED 61 YEARS
         W/O, SASIDHARAN, KAIRALI NIVAS, THEVANNOOR P.O.,
         ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM,
         PIN - 691533

         BY ADVS.
         P.SIVARAJ
         MEGHA.M.S.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE AREA MANAGER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER,
         KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK (KERALA BANK),
         REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         PB NO.5122 EAST FORT, FORT P.O.,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
    2    THE BRANCH MANAGER
         KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK (KERALA BANK),
         CHADAYAMANGALAM BRANCH, KOLLAM, PIN - 691534
    3    ADV. NEERAVIL B. KRISHNAKUMAR,
         ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER |ST FLOOR,
         PARAVOOR BUILDINGS, EAST OF CIVIL STATION,
         KOLLAM, PIN - 691013

         SRI.P.C. SASIDHARAN, STANDING COUNSEL, R1 AND R2

     THIS WRIT PETITION     (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP       FOR
ADMISSION ON 22.05.2024,    THE COURT ON THE SAME        DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.18255 of 2024
                               2




                         JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024 The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made by the Kerala State Co-operative Bank (Kerala Bank) to the 1st petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. The Bank paid ₹20 lakhs to the 1st petitioner as Cash Credit facility in the year 2020. The 2nd petitioner stood as surety to the said loan. The petitioners state that though the petitioners made remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of the financial advance, they could not pay the repayment instalments promptly later due to financial stringency. The repayment of advance fell into arrears later. It happened due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioners.

3

3. Though the petitioners requested the Bank to permit the petitioners to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly instalments, 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 Exts.P1 and P2 notices.

4. The petitioners state that they are still in a position to clear the overdue amounts towards the loan, if sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly instalments. If respondents 1 and 2 are permitted to continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the petitioners, they 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 WP(C) No.18255 of 2024 4 petitioners. On behalf of respondents 1 and 2, it is submitted that the advance was given to the 1st petitioner in the year 2020. The petitioners committed default in maintaining the advance.

6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioners and required them to clear the dues. The petitioners deliberately omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioners invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The impugned Exts.P1 and P2 were issued in these circumstances. The petitioners have not advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the Bank.

7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if the petitioners are ready and willing to remit the outstanding amount in instalments, a short breathing time can be granted to the petitioners to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel WP(C) No.18255 of 2024 5 submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioners as on 22.05.2024 is ₹23,83,446/-.

8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Standing Counsel representing the Bank.

9. The specific case of the petitioners is that the petitioners have been making the repayment and maintaining the loan account initially. The default in repayment of the loan occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioners. The petitioners have 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 petitioners to clear off the liability.

11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The petitioners shall remit the outstanding amount of ₹23,83,446/- in 12 consecutive and equal monthly instalments WP(C) No.18255 of 2024 6 along with accruing interest and other Bank charges, if any. First of such instalments shall be paid on or before 24.06.2024.

(ii) If the petitioners commit single default in making payments as directed above, the Bank will be at liberty to continue with the coercive proceedings against the petitioners in accordance with law.

(iii) If the petitioners make payments as directed above, coercive proceedings, if any, against the petitioners shall stand deferred.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.18255 of 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18255/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 04-08- 2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE NOTICE DATED 08-05-2024 ISSUED BY ADV.

NEERAVIL 8. KRISHNAKUMAR IN M.C. NO.

364/2024 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF LST PETITIONER'S WIFE SMT. MANIJA Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF LST PETITIONER'S FATHER-IN- IAW, SRI.MADHU