Joseph M.K vs Authorised Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 18344 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
   TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 18202 OF 2021
PETITIONER :

    1     JOSEPH M.K.,
          AGED 62 YEARS,
          S/O. KURUVILA, KUTTIPARICHEL HOUSE, NEENDOOR P.O.,
          KOTTAYAM-686601, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 4D,
          ROYAL FORTRESS, VADAKKEKOTTA, THRIPPUNITHURA-682301.

    2     BARHAM C.M.,
          AGED 53 YEARS,
          S/O. MATHAI, CHUNDAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MURUKKUMTHOTTY,
          KALAPPARACKAL P.O., POOPPARA, IDUKKI-685619.

          BY ADV SANJAY THAMPI


RESPONDENTS :

    1     AUTHORISED OFFICER,
          BANK OF BARODA, ROSARB, ERNAKULAM, MG ROAD,
          ERNAKULAM-682016.

    2     BANK OF BARODA,
          ERNAKULAM NORTH BRANCH, 36/637A,
          BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM NORTH,
          ERNAKULAM-682018,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

    3     THE BRANCH MANAGER,
          BANK OF BARODA, ERNAKULAM NORTH BRANCH, 36/637A,
          BANERJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM NORTH, ERNAKULAM-682018.

          BY ADV.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18202 OF 2021
                                      2

                        BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                        W.P.(C).No.18202 of 2021
                      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                 Dated this the 7th day of September, 2021


                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioners are the partners of M/s.Taj Traders which is

engaged in the manufacture and supply of silver ornaments. They had

availed a financial facility of cash credit to the tune of Rs.50,00,000/-

(Rupees Fifty Lakhs only). However, due to the default committed in

repayment of their cash credit facility, the account was declared as 'NPA'

and proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial

Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the

SARFAESI Act) were initiated.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner,

Adv.Sanjay Thampi that, though petitioners were earlier granted a one

time settlement facility, due to their precarious situation, they were unable

to abide by the terms of one time settlement. It is also submitted that the

pandemic Covid-19 has compounded their hardships. The learned counsel

submitted that in spite of the above hardships in view of the passage of

time, petitioners' position has improved though minimally. According to

the learned counsel, petitioners are taking earnest efforts to clear off their

liabilities through another form of one time settlement, if the Bank would

agree to offer it to them.

WP(C) NO. 18202 OF 2021

3. Adv.Nagaraj Narayanan appearing on behalf of the

respondent submitted that the one time settlement earlier granted to the

petitioner had lapsed due to the default of the petitioners themselves to

comply with the terms of such settlement. According to the learned

counsel, petitioner will not be able to clear the liabilities and any indulgence

shown to the petitioner will only be in vain.

4. Taking note of the second wave of pandemic which has

affected the country at large, I deem it fit to direct the respondent Bank to

grant an opportunity to the petitioner to make amends for the default.

This opportunity can be in the form of a proposal for one time settlement

to be submitted by the petitioner in a time bound manner.

5. having regard to the peculiar situation, it is directed that if

the petitioner submit an application/ proposal to settle the liability with the

respondent Bank within a period of ten days from today, respondents 2 and

3 shall consider the said application/ proposal within one month thereafter.

All proceedings for sale of petitioner's property shall be kept in abeyance

till such a decision is taken.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

RKM WP(C) NO. 18202 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18202/2021

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT DATED NIL.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN IA NO. 3075/2013 IN SA NO. 462/2013.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/08/2013 IN MC NO. 201/2013 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THODUPUZHA.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 06/08/2019 OF THE RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONERS.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHIEF MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA DATED 16/09/2019 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.42,00,000/-.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE BANK PASS BOOK OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.