Albert P Joseph @ Albert P.J vs M/S.Pnb Housing Finance Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 1464 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

    THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 24TH POUSHA, 1942

                        WP(C).No.576 OF 2021(V)


PETITIONER/S:

                ALBERT P JOSEPH @ ALBERT P.J,AGED 52 YEARS
                S/O. JOSEPH, MERRY LAND, PEEDIAKKAL HOUSE,
                PIPELINE ROAD, THAMMANAM P.O. KARANAKODAM,
                ERNAKULAM 682 032.

                BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         M/S.PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD
                48/559C, 1ST FLOOR, R.P. ARCADE, NEAR GOLD SOUK MALL,
                PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM 682 019,
                REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.

      2         THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
                M/S. PNB HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED, 48/559C, 1ST FLOOR,
                R.P. ARCADE, NEAR GOLD SOUK MALL, PONNURUNNI,
                VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM 682 019.

                R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.576 OF 2021                  2



                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 14th day of January 2021

The petitioner in this petition challenges Ext.P1 notice of

possession under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act ('the

SARFAESI Act' for brevity).

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that the petitioner has taken two housing loans in the year 2015

and 2016 and term of those loans is for 15 years. He submits that

because of pandemic Covid-19, there was irregularity in payment

of the loan and therefore, the secured creditor has taken symbolic

possession of the secured assets. Learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to settle the

matter and to regularise the loan account.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits

that if the petitioner approaches the respondents for regularisation

of his loan accounts by filing appropriate application, the

respondents may consider the same.

4. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed

of, with a direction to the respondents to consider the application

for regularisation of loan accounts, if any, moved by the petitioner

in the matter. It is made clear that this Court has not considered

the matter on merits and has not interfered with any action taken

by the respondents under the SARFAESI Act.

5. Interim order is continued for a period of two weeks in

order to enable the petitioner to file appropriate application for

regularisation as decided.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

                                                 A.M.BADAR
ajt                                                JUDGE





                           APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1             TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.12.2020
                       ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.