P.A.Mahamood vs Bank Of Baroda
2021 Latest Caselaw 5708 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 28TH
                        MAGHA,1942

          RP.No.127 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21139/2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21139/2019(N) OF HIGH
                     COURT OF KERALA


REVIEW PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER:

           P.A.MAHAMOOD
           AGED 67 YEARS
           S/O PAKYARA ANNU HAJI,
           PROPRIETOR M/S BEKAL INTERNATIONAL SEA VIEW
           RESORT,UDMA, KASARGODE,PIN-671319.

           BY ADVS.
           SMT.SREEJA SOHAN K.
           SMT.R.REJI (ATTINGAL)
           SRI.ATUL SOHAN

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1     BANK OF BARODA
           KANHANGAD BRANCH,
           REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
           APSARA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX,
           T.B.ROAD,P.O.KANHANGAD,
           PIN-671315.

     2     GENERAL MANAGER,
           BANK OF BARODA,ZONAL OFFICE,
           CHENNAI.


           SRI.JOMY GEORGE,SC

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP.No.127/2021
[IN WP(C).21139/2019]          2



                        O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking review of the

judgment dated 02.08.2019 in W.P.(C).No.21139/2019, not

because there is any error apparent on its face but because he

has not been able to pay off the amounts, as ordered therein,

within the time frame fixed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner-Smt.Sreeja

Sohan.K, submitted that the sole reason why her client has

been unable to comply with the directions in the judgment is

because of the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions and that this is

obvious from the fact that, out of Rs.4,04,00,000/-, he has

already paid more than 3,00,00,000/-. She further added

that, pending this review petition, her client has paid another

amount of Rs.40,00,000/- and that the balance payable by

him is less than Rs. One Crore. She, therefore, prayed that

her client be granted at least 10 more instalments to pay off

this amount.

3. In response, the learned Standing Counsel for the

Bank-Sri.Jomy George, affirmed that the balance outstanding RP.No.127/2021

in the loan account of the petitioner is nearly Rs.One Crore

and that the Bank cannot grant him any further latitude, other

than offering him two or three instalments to pay off this. He

submitted that if the petitioner is willing to accede to this, all

further action initiated by his client under the provisions of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI), can be

deferred for the said period.

4. Since I notice that the petitioner is seeking ten

instalments, I pointedly asked Sri.Jomy Geeorge whether any

further latitude can be shown to the petitioner and he fairly

conceded that if he pays off the balance in the account in not

more than five instalements, his client would not stand in the

way.

5. Taking note of the afore submissions, I order this

review petition to a limited extent of modifying the payment

structure fixed in the judgment, by allowing the petitioner to

pay off the balance outstanding as on today, with all

applicable charges and interest, in five equal monthly

instalments, commencing from 26.02.2021.

 RP.No.127/2021
[IN WP(C).21139/2019]         4

After I dictated this part of this order, Smt.Sreeja Sohan,

learned counsel for the petitioner, requested that her client be

also granted liberty to approach the Bank for a One Time

Settlement or for waiver of penal interest, as he may be

entitled, as per law. This, of course, is a liberty available to

the petitioner and therefore, I leave it open to him to invoke,

if he is so interested; in which event, the Bank will consider

the same appropriately.

Sd/-

                                   DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

                                            JUDGE


LEK
 RP.No.127/2021
[IN WP(C).21139/2019]      5


                        APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1        THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
                   02.08.2019.

ANNEXURE A2        THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR

ONETIME SETTLEMENT AND ITS REPLY DATED 31.12.2019

ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST AND ITS REPLY DATED 17.12.2020.

ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AS ON 20.01.2021.

ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE FOR SALE UNDER RULE 8(5),8(6) AND 9(1)OF SECURITY INTEREST ENFORCEMENT RULE 2002.

ANNEXURE A6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.1/2021 DATED 29.01.2021.

ANNEXURE A7 TRUE RECEIT OF REMITTANCE OF RS.40 LAKHS DATED 29.01.2021.