Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Kerala High Court
Preethi Subhash vs Union Bank Of India on 23 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 18507 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
PREETHI SUBHASH
AGED 36 YEARS, W/O SUBHASH, KALATHIL HOUSE,
VIMALANAGAR POST. OZHAKODY, MANANTHAVADY,
WAYANAD, PIN - 670 645.
BY ADVS.
V.A.VINOD
N.S.AJAY
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION BANK OF INDIA
KALPETTA CIVIL STATION BRANCH, KALPETTA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BANK MANAGER,
PIN - 673 121.
2 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
KALPETTA CIVIL STATION BRANCH, KALPETTA,
PIN - 673 121.
BY ADVS.
ASP.KURUP
SADCHITH.P.KURUP(K/1419/2002)
C.P.ANIL RAJ(K/872/2007)
SIVA SURESH(K/2688/2022)
ATHIRA VIJAYAN(K/199/2024)
B.SREEDEVI(K/169/2024)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024 The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made by the Union Bank of India 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 ₹55.80 lakhs to the petitioner as Housing Loan in the year 2019. The petitioner states that though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of the financial advance, she could not pay the repayment instalments promptly later. The repayment of loan fell into arrears later due to Covid-19 pandemic. It happened due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.
3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024 :3: 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 Ext.P5 notice.
4. The petitioner states that she is 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 the respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the petitioner, she 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 respondents, it is submitted that the loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2019. The petitioner committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and required her to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024 :4: omitted to do so. 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.P5 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 balance overdue amount immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioner is ₹62.72 lakhs and the overdue amount is ₹5.80 lakhs.
8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the Bank. W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024 :5:
9. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining the loan account initially. The default in repayment of the loan account 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 her liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The petitioner shall remit an amount of ₹2 lakhs on or before 06.06.2024 and the balance overdue amount in subsequent consecutive two equal monthly instalments thereafter, along with accruing interest and other Bank charges, if any.W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024
:6:
(ii) If the petitioner commits single default in making payments as directed above, the respondents will be at liberty to continue with coercive proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law.
(iii) The petitioner shall also pay current EMIs along with the aforesaid payments.
(iv) If the petitioner pays the instalments as directed above, any coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE AMR W.P.(C) No.18507 of 2024 :7: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18507/2024 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P (C) NO 29418/2023 DATED 11.09.2023.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 20.12.2023.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A NO 1/2024 IN W.P (C) NO 29418/2023 DATED 14.03.2024.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT DATED 01.04.2024 ISSUED FROM NMC SPECIALITY HOSPITAL.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED
15.05.2024.