Kerala High Court
Remanan.C vs The Trivandrum Co-Operative ... on 21 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 1ST MAGHA, 1942
WP(C).No.1705 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
REMANAN.C,AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. CHELLAPPAN, VISMAYA KUZHIVILA VEEDU,
PANANVILA, NALANCHIRA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 015
BY ADV. SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE TRIVANDRUM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD
MAIN BRANCH, M G ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER
2 JESSIR,S/O. MUHAMMAD KUNJU, JESSIR MANZIL,
KALLAMBALAM, PUTHUSSERIMUKKU P.O, KUDAVOOR VILLAGE,
KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 6 695 605
SMT. NISHA GEORGE, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.1705 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of January 2021
Heard both sides.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that the petitioner had availed house maintenance
loan of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only), which he
could not repay and therefore he approached this Court by filing
W.P.(C). No.20494/2016. Undisputedly, the petitioner was
granted time of eight equal monthly instalments for clearing the
overdue amount by judgment dated 16.06.2016 in the said
petition. It is not in dispute that this judgment is not complied
with by the petitioner. Ext.P1 judgment makes it clear that in
case of any default of payment of any of the amount as
directed, it shall be open for the respondent bank to take such
steps in accordance with law.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has
submitted that in the light of agreement at Ext.P2, there is
likelihood of the petitioner getting amount in few months so as
to enable him to repay the same.
4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondent-secured creditor submits that today the auction is
scheduled and it was adjourned from time to time for showing
indulgence to the petitioner, but now he has specific instructions
to oppose the petition.
5. Acceding the request of the petitioner would amount
to breach of terms and conditions imposed by this Court while
deciding the writ petition bearing No.20494 of 2016 dated
16.06.2016. This course of action is not permitted.
The writ petition is filed impugned by the action taken by
the secured creditor under the Securitisation and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act,
their auction is scheduled today. In the light of the jdugment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Authorized Officer,
State Bank of Travancore and another vs. Mathew K.C
(2018(1) KLT 784) , this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain
the challenge regarding the steps taken by the secured creditor
under the SARFAESI Act. There is no other alternative but to
reject the petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M.BADAR
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WP(C0 NO
20494/2016 DATED 16-06-2016
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF SALE AGREEMENT DATED 23-06-
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 14-
12-2020 ISSUED BY THE TRIVANDRUM CO-
OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD
