Devassykutty vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 687 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.29065 OF 2020(G)


PETITIONERS:

               DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 66 YEARS
               S/O.OUSEPH, POTTOKARAN HOUSE,
               CHENGAL, KALADI P.O., ERNAKULAM, KERALA.

               BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP (KALLAR)

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
               REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT STATE RELIEF
               COMMISSIONER AND CONVENOR,
               STATE DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY,
               OBSERVATORY HILLS, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695033.

      2        RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
               REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
               ERNAKULAM NORTH, KALOOR, KOCHI - 18.

      3        DIWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED
               REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, BRANCH
               MANAGER, DIWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.,
               DREAM MALL, 1ST FLOOR, LBS MARG, MUMBAI - 400 078.

      4        DIWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED
               REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, BRANCH
               OFFICER, GROUND FLOOR AND 1ST FLOOR, KNM BUILDING,
               NEAR RENAI MEDICITY, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM - 682
               025.

               BY ADV. SRI.DENU JOSEPH - SC

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 29065/20
                                          2


                                 JUDGMENT

Through this writ petition, the petitioner

calls into question certain proceedings

initiated and being pursued by the respondent

Bank under the provisions of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial

Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest

Act ('the SARFAESI Act' for brevity).

2. I have heard the learned counsel for

the petitioner and the learned counsel for the

respondent Bank.

3. As I proceed to consider the reliefs

prayed for by the petitioner herein, I am

conscious that I am jurisdictionally

proscribed from entering into any enquiry or

consideration of the legality or otherwise of

the orders impugned in this writ petition on

account of the imperative statutory provisions

and the binding judicial pronouncements,

especially that of the Hon'ble Supreme Court WPC 29065/20

in Union Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon

[(2010) 8 SCC 110] and in Authorised Officer,

State Bank of Travancore and Another v. Mathew

K.C. [2018 (1) KLT 784]. I, therefore, cannot

and do not propose to consider any of the

legal contentions raised by the petitioner on

its merits.

4. However, obviously being aware of

this, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner has prayed that notwithstanding the

limitations of jurisdiction as aforementioned,

the petitioner may be granted some leniency or

latitude in order to enable him to pay off the

overdue amounts in installments.

5. I, therefore, enquired with the

learned counsel for the Bank as to whether the

request on the part of the petitioner can be

allowed, especially on account of the fact

that the Banks are only interested in

recovering and not in maintaining and keep WPC 29065/20

pending litigations and legal proceedings

against such recovery. The learned counsel has

fairly submitted that the Bank is concerned

about recovery at the earliest and that if the

petitioner pays off the dues quickly, it would

be to their interest also.

               6.   In   view     of   the    fact    that    the

      proceedings        initiated       by   the    Bank    would

consume time to culminate in total recovery

and taking into account the financial

constraints and burden that have been alleged

and pleaded by the petitioner, I am inclined

to dispose of this writ petition allowing him

an opportunity to pay off the overdue amounts

demanded by the Bank.

7. The learned counsel for the Bank at

this time submits that the overdues comes to

Rs.48,15,136/- and that if the petitioner pays

an amount Rs.10,00,000- within a period of one

month from today, the balance can be allowed WPC 29065/20

to be paid in ten equal monthly installments,

commencing from 15.03.2021, so that the

account can then be regularised.

               8.    The        learned        counsel      for      the

      petitioner       says       that     the       petitioner       is

agreeable to the above offer made by the Bank

and therefore that the writ petition may be

ordered granting permission to the petitioner

to pay off the amount in the manner as afore.

9. In such circumstances, I direct the

petitioner to pay an amount Rs.10,00,000/- on

or before 10.02.2021; and if he makes this

payment, then he will be permitted to pay off

the balance, along with applicable charges and

interest, in ten equal monthly instalments,

commencing from 15.03.2021. He shall also, in

addition to this, pay the regular EMIs without

fail. If such payment is made by the

petitioner, his loan account would stand

regularised and he would then be at liberty to WPC 29065/20

service the account as per the terms of the

loan sanctioned. It goes without saying that

if there is any default in making the payment

as directed above, the benefit granted under

this judgment would stand vacated and the Bank

will be at liberty to recover the entire

liability from the petitioner by continuing

with the proceedings from the stage it is on

this date.

I make it clear that the directions in

this judgment are peremptory in nature and

that the petitioner will have to comply with

the same meticulously.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

                                          DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
      RR                                          JUDGE
 WPC 29065/20



                           APPENDIX
      PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

      EXHIBIT P1        THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
                        28/5/2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH

RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 28/9/2020.

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23/10/2020 BEFORE THE 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT SHOWING THE SUBMISSION OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/10/2020.