Kerala High Court
Thomas Varkey vs The Authorised Officer/Chief ... on 15 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
THOMAS VARKEY
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O.VARKEY, VANIYAKIZHAKKEL, ELLUMANNOM P.O.,
MANATHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT 670 645 REP.
BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI. VARKEY,
S/O.THOMMAN, AGED 76 YEARS, VANIYAKIZHAKKEL,
ELLUMANNOM P.O., MANATHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD
DISTRICT 670 645
BY ADV ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER
THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR,
KVR TOWER, PAMPAN MADHAVAN ROAD, OPP. LIC OFFICE,
TALAP, KANNUR, KERALA 670 002
2 THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK
MANANTHAVADY BRANCH, SAN JOSE SHOPPING COMPLEX,
ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL ROAD, MANATHAVADY P.O.,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 670 645, REP. BY ITS BRANCH
MANAGER
BY ADVS.
K.K.JOHN
ASISH K.JOHN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 15.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
-2-
A.M.BADAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 15th day of July, 2021
JUDGMENT
Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner has availed a housing loan of
Rs.40,00,000/- on 10.4.2017 and loan against property of
Rs.9,75,000/- on 10.5.2018. After few defaults, the loan
account turned as Non Performing Asset on 8.1.2021. The
total outstanding amount in loan accounts is about
Rs.52,32,819/-. The overdue amount is Rs.5,00,000/-.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner is a NRI and he has lost his job because
of the pandemic. Now, he is again employed and he has to
take care of his family and therefore, he be permitted to
repay the overdue amount in 10 instalments apart from
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
regular payment of EMIs.
4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the
respondents opposed the prayer of the petitioner and
contended that the petitioner has to repay the entire overdue
amount in one instalment itself and grant of instalment
would delay the regularisation of the loan accounts. The
learned senior counsel for the respondents submitted that
the court may grant suitable instalments to the petitioner for
repayment of both the loan amount, with imposition of
default clause.
5. I have considered the submissions made above.
Considering the fact that the loan account has turned to the
Non Performing Asset recently on 8.1.2021 during Covid
-19 pandemic situation and as the petitioner has shown his
willingness to repay the overdue amount in instalments,
apart from regular repayment of the loan, so also, as the
respondents are willing to accept the overdue amount in
instalments, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the
following direction:
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
The petitioner to clear the entire overdue
amount with charges, if any, in eight equated
successive monthly instalments commencing from
16.8.2021. In addition, the petitioner shall also pay
the EMI regularly. If the petitioner complies with
this direction, the respondents shall keep the
coercive action in abeyance. No further extention of
time shall be granted to the petitioner in any
circumstances. A single default in compliance with
the direction shall entitle the respondents to continue
with the action against the petitioner under the
SARFAESI Act.
sd
A.M.BADAR, JUDGE.
dl/
WP(C) NO. 12954 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12954/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF
HIS FATHER DATED 20.5.2017
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND
OTHERS INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF
SEC.13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT, 2002
DATED 24.5.2021
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
9.6.2021
