Suresh Babu K. S vs Kerala State Co-Op Bank Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 4467 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

     MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.3180 OF 2021(V)


PETITIONERS:

      1        SURESH BABU K. S.
               AGED 60 YEARS
               S/O. SUKUMARAN, KARAYIL HOUSE, THALIKULAM P. O.,
               NATTIKA, CHAVAKKAD.

      2        USHA
               AGED 53 YEARS
               W/O. SURESH BABU, KARAYIL HOUSE, THALIKULAM P. O.,
               NATTIKA, CHAVAKKAD.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A
               SMT.M.A.SULFIA

RESPONDENTS:

      1        KERALA STATE CO-OP BANK LTD.
               SAHAKARANA SHADAPTHI MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUPADAM,
               TRISSUR - 680022, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
               OFFICER.

      2        AUTHORISED OFFICER
               KERALA STATE CO-OP. BANK LTD., SAHAKARANA SHADAPTHI
               MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUPADAM, TRISSUR - 680022.




               GP- THUSHARA JAMES

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.3180 OF 2021(V)

                                   2

                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of February 2021

Heard both sides.

2. Petitioners have taken loan from the 1 st respondent Bank. It

is the case of the petitioners that because of flood and pandemic

Covid-19, so also losses suffered in the business, they were unable to

repay the loan. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that

the petitioners are willing refund the overdue amount of loan in twenty

installments.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents opposed the

petition by contending that the petitioners are chronic defaulters and it

is not feasible for the 1 st respondent to accept the proposal of the

petitioners for refund of loan in twenty monthly installments. He

submits that if the petitioners refund the overdue amount of loan in 5

equal installments and pays EMIs regularly, then the Bank may

consider keep coercive action under the SARFAESI Act in abeyance.

4. I have considered the submissions so advanced and

perused the materials placed before me.

5. After recall of the loan by notice dated 07/12/2020, now

the possession notice is already issued for taking possession of the

secured asset. However, it is seen that the loan is to be refunded by WP(C).No.3180 OF 2021(V)

the year 2025. In this view of the matter, and keeping in mind the

fact that the respondents are also willing to grant installments to the

petitioners, the petition is disposed of with the following directions.

6. The petitioners to repay the entire overdue amount of the

loan in ten equated monthly installments commencing from

15.02.2021 apart from regular payment of EMIs to the 1 st respondent

Bank. If these directions are complied, then the respondents shall

keep the coercive action under abeyance. A single default shall entail

the respondents to continue with the coercive action.

No further time shall be granted to the petitioners to comply with

the directions given in this judgment.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR Nsd //true copy// JUDGE PA to Judge WP(C).No.3180 OF 2021(V)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICES DATED 01.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.