Shafeek A vs The Authorized Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 7780 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

     FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.5271 OF 2021(H)


PETITIONER:

               SHAFEEK A
               AGED 50 YEARS
               S/O. AHAMMED SHAREEF, SHEEBA MANZIL, MUSAVARIKUNNU,
               PUNALUR P.O, KOLLAM-691 305

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI
               SMT.N.V.SANDHYA
               SMT.DHANUJA M.S

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
               STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH,
               LMS COMPOUND, OPPOSITE MUSEUM WEST GATE, VIKAS BHAVAN
               P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

      2        THE BRANCH MANAGER,
               STATE BANK OF INDIA, PUNALUR BRANCH, KOLLAM DISTRICT-
               691 305


OTHER PRESENT:

               SC-SRI. TOM THOMAS

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.5271 OF 2021(H)

                                    2

                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 5th day of March 2021

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner has availed a housing loan from the

respondent Bank and the same was declared an non-performing asset

as the petitioner defaulted in payment of the same. Accordingly

possession notice under the SARFAESI Act came to be issued and

secured assets have been put to sale.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits

that the secured asset is a residential house of the petitioner and the

petitioner wants to clear the recalled amount of loan within a year by

suitable instalments.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent-Bank opposed the

petition by contending that as the petition is challenging the action

taken by the secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act, the same is not

maintainable and therefore, it be dismissed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is not now disputing any steps taken by the secured creditor

for recovery of the recalled loan, but he is seeking instalments.

6. I have considered the submissions so advanced and I am

satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, as the WP(C).No.5271 OF 2021(H)

respondent Bank is interested in getting the amount of loan with

interest and other charges, the following order would serve the

interest of justice:

The petitioner to clear the entire amount of recalled loan with

interest and other charges in twelve equated successive monthly

instalments commencing from 09/03/2021. If the petitioner complies

with this direction, then the respondents shall keep the coercive action

under the SARFAESI Act initiated against the petitioner in abeyance. A

single default in complying with this direction shall entail the

respondent to continue with the action under the SARFAESI Act.

Needless to mention that the petitioner shall not be granted any

further extension of time for compliance with this direction for any

reason.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR Nsd //true copy// JUDGE PA to Judge WP(C).No.5271 OF 2021(H)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN O.A. NO. 501/2019 BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT ERNAKULAM DATED 3.8.19.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 9.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATD 27.1.2021 ISSUED BY TEH 1ST RESPONDENT.