Mr. Sameer vs State Bank Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 9242 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
    WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 24854 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          MR. SAMEER,
          AGED 42 YEARS
          S/O SHOUKATHALI, VALIYATHODIYIIL HOUSE,
          KARAMBURATH PARAMBA,
          KOLATHARA P.O, KOZHIKODE - 673 655.

          BY ADV E.A.BIJUMON



RESPONDENT:

          STATE BANK OF INDIA,
          ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH,
          40/947, 1ST FLOOR R S BUILDING, METRO PILLAR NO. 697.
          OPP. MAHARAJAS COLLEGE GROUND, M G ROAD,
          ERNAKULUM, PIN - 682 011,
          REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

          BY ADV TOM K.THOMAS




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 24854 OF 2022

                                   2


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved

by coercive steps taken by the respondent Bank under the

provisions of the SARFAESI Act to recover amounts due under

facilities extended to the petitioner.

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, it

is the submission of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for

the respondent Bank that the petitioner offered a sum of Rs.2

Crores towards full and final settlement of a liability of

approximately Rs.3.65 Crores. It is submitted that the proposal

was not acceptable to the Bank and a communication dated

08.08.2022 has been issued to the petitioner requesting the

petitioner to improve the offer and also to remit 5% of the

amount offered towards the loan liability as a condition for

forwarding the proposal for consideration of the competent

authority of the Bank. It is submitted that the Bank normally

insists for payment of 5% of the One Time Settlement amount

proposed and this condition cannot be waived in the case of the

petitioner.

WP(C) NO. 24854 OF 2022

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the

petitioner will improve the offer for One Time Settlement and the

same may be directed to be considered by the competent

authority of the respondent Bank.

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case and taking into account the submissions made by either

side, it is directed that the petitioner will make a fresh offer for

One Time Settlement taking into account the contents of the

communication dated 08.08.2022, which has been issued to the

petitioner. If the petitioner makes such proposal along with a

payment of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs only) towards the

loan liability (which shall be paid into the account mentioned in

the communication dated 08.08.2022), the competent authority

of the respondent Bank shall take a decision on the proposal after

affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The further

coercive steps against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till

a decision is taken on the proposal for One Time Settlement to be

submitted by the petitioner, as above. This benefit will be

available only if the petitioner submits a fresh proposal for One

Time Settlement together with a payment of Rs.10,00,000/-

(Rupees ten lakhs only) within a period of ten days from today. WP(C) NO. 24854 OF 2022

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE DK WP(C) NO. 24854 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24854/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit1 TRUE COPY OF THE SECTION 13 (2) NOTICE DATED 03.08.2021

Exhibit2 TRUE COPY OF THE RULE 8(1) NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 27.12.2021.

Exhibit3 TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER NOTICE DATED 20.07.2022.