Raja Rajeshwari vs The Authorized Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 4637 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

     TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 20TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.3367 OF 2021(U)


PETITIONERS:

      1        RAJA RAJESHWARI
               AGED 54 YEARS
               W/O. MURUKESAN NARAYAN, RESIDING AT NARMADA,
               PUTHANKULAM, BHOOTHAKULAM P.O., BHOOTHAKULAM VILLAGE,
               KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM-691302.

      2        VAISHNAVI MURUKESAN
               AGED 27 YEARS
               D/O. MURUKESAN NARAYAN, RESIDING AT NARMADA,
               PUTHANKULAM, BHOOTHAKULAM P.O., BHOOTHAKULAM VILLAGE,
               KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM-691302.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.B.DIPU SACH DEEV
               SRI.ARUN BABU

RESPONDENT:

               THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
               THE QUILON CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED, 960,
               KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691001.




               ADV RENU DP --SC FOR RESPONDENTS

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.3367 OF 2021(U)

                                    2

                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 9th day of February 2021

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Though the prayer made in the petition shows that the

petitioners are challenging Ext.P1 notice issued by the Advocate

Commissioner under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the learned

counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioners are challenging

action taken by the secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. It is

argued that the 1st petitioner is the guarantor of loan taken by her

husband and she wants to clear the loan in installments.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the entire

overdue amount is Rs.10,81,052/- and the recalled amount is

Rs.25,39,418/-. The term of loan is upto 23.12.2023 and therefore,

at the most, five installments can be given to the petitioners by

directing them to deposit 1/3 rd of the overdue amount by the end of

March 2021.

4. As, the 1st petitioner being the guarantor of the loan taken

by her husband is willing to repay the loan, the petition is disposed of

with the following directions.

5. The petitioners to pay 1/3rd of overdue amount, ie,

Rs.10,81,052/- by the end of March, 2021 and the remaining balance WP(C).No.3367 OF 2021(U)

overdue amount is to be paid by the petitioners in five equated

monthly installments commencing from 08/03/2021. In addition,

petitioners should pay regular EMI. If these directions are complied

with, then the respondent shall keep the coercive action in abeyance.

A single default on the part of the petitioners shall entail the

respondent to continue with the coercive action for recovery of loan.

Needless to mention that no further extension of time shall be granted

to the petitioners for complying with this direction.

Sd/-

                                              A.M.BADAR
Nsd
//true copy//                                    JUDGE
PA to Judge
 WP(C).No.3367 OF 2021(U)




                           APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1           TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE POSSESSION

NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN MC NO.264/2020 DATED 19/01/2021.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE RATION CARD AND ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF E-MAIL AND ITS PARTICULARS DATED 01/02/2021.