Suseela vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 13282 Ker

WP(C) NO. 11234 OF 2021                       1



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

           THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1943

                            WP(C) NO. 11234 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

              SUSEELA,
              AGED 50 YEARS
              W/O.UDAYAKUMAR, SUBI BHAVAN, EDAKKAD SOUTH, EDAKKAD P.O.,
              KUNNATHOOR, KOLLAM 691 552.

              BY ADV B.MOHANLAL

RESPONDENT/S:

      1       STATE OF KERALA,
              REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE
              DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      2       THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
              GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, STATUE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
              695 003.

      3       THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL)
              OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION P.O.,
              KOLLAM 691 013.

      4       THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
              (OLD KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED), DISTRICT
              OFFICE, KOLLAM 691 001, REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER.

      5       THE BRANCH MANAGER
              THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED (OLD KOLLAM
              DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED), BHARANIKAVU BRANCH,
              BHARANIKAVU P.O., KOLLAM 690 520


OTHER PRESENT:
            SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN, GP


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2021,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 11234 OF 2021                 2




                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                --------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C.) No.11234 of 2021
                   --------------------------------------
               Dated this the 24th day of June, 2021


                                JUDGMENT

Petitioner availed a housing loan from the 5th

respondent-Bank on 31.5.2013. Admittedly, there was some

default in repaying the housing loan instalments. Therefore,

the Bank took steps to recover the amount. The petitioner

approached the Bank for availing the 'One Time Settlement'

scheme. As per Ext.P1, the Bank issued an order by which

the petitioner is allowed to clear the amount in OTS scheme

by paying an amount of Rs.13,89,851/-. Ext.P1 is dated

27.2.2020. According to the petitioner, she was not able to

pay the amount because of the financial stringency and also

because of the present pandemic situation. Now, the counsel

for the petitioner submitted that an amount of Rs.14 lakhs is

deposited in the account of her son in the respondent Bank.

The son of the petitioner is ready to transfer this amount to

the loan account to settle the amount as per Ext.P1. But, the

Bank is not accepting the submission and the Bank says that

Ext.P1, One Time Settlement scheme is already expired.

2. The Standing Counsel appearing for the Bank

submitted that the OTS scheme by which Ext.P1 was issued

is already over and now, there is a new 'One Time

Settlement' scheme in existence from 1.5.2021 to 31.8.2021.

The petitioner can approach the Bank with a representation

to avail that OTS facility. To show the bonafides of the

petitioner, the Standing Counsel submitted that let the

petitioner transfer the amount in the account of her son to

the loan account.

3. After hearing both sides, I think this writ petition

can be disposed, directing the petitioner to approach the

Bank. It is true that the OTS facility as per Ext.P1 is already

expired. The counsel for the petitioner says that she was not

able to avail that facility because of the financial difficulties

and the COVID-19 pandemic situation. The Standing Counsel

says that there is a new 'OTS' facility available now. The

apprehension of the petitioner is that if she accept the new

'OTS' facility, the amount will be huge. These aspects can be

considered by the Bank considering the entire facts and

circumstances of the case. In these type of cases, the Bank

should take some lenient view. It is true that it is the liberty

of the Bank to decide all these issues. But, I make it clear

that if a representation is made by the petitioner for relaxing

the interest portion, the Bank will consider the same, in

accordance to the law. Therefore, this writ petition is

disposed with the following prayers :

1) The petitioner will transfer an amount of

Rs.14,00,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs) to the loan

account of the petitioner within three weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2) The petitioner can submit a representation for

availing the OTS scheme within that period. If such a

representation is received, the Bank will take steps to

grant all the benefits of OTS facility or other available

facilities, so that the petitioner can close the loan account.

3) The Bank should complete the above exercise

within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the

representation.

4) Thereafter, on payment of the balance amount if any,

the entire documents of the petitioner submitted at the

time of availing the loan should be returned to the

petitioner.

With the above observation, this Writ Petition is

disposed of.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX OF WPC NO.11234/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT IN THE ADALATH ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 4 AND

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE AMOUNT REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23/4/2021 IN THE 5TH RESPONDENT BANK IN THE NAME OF SRI. SUMESH.

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23/4/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.