Ushakumari K.G vs Indian Overseas Bank
2022 Latest Caselaw 9290 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. 22323 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          USHAKUMARI K.G
          AGED 64 YEARS, W/O PRABALAKUMAR,
          CHERUVALLIMODIYIL PUTHEN VEEDU,
          EDYARANMULA, EDAYARANMULA WEST P.O.,
          PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 689532

          BY ADV E.V.MOLY



RESPONDENT:

          INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK
          EDAYARANMULA BRANCH,
          KOLLAMPADICAL COMMERCIAL CENTRE WARD 2,
          EDAYARANMULA , PATHANAMTHITTA
          REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER., PIN - 689532

          BY ADVS.
          Sunil Shankar A
          VIDYA GANGADHARAN(K/000424/2020)
          FARHA MATHER K.B.(K/000988/2020)




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P (C) No.22323/2022                         -2-

                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner has availed an overdraft facility from the respondent bank. On

default being committed the bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI

Act) to recover the amounts due in terms of the agreement executed by the petitioner.

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

the learned counsel for the petitioner that the sale of the petitioner's property scheduled to

be held on 29-07-2022 did not fructify. It is submitted that the petitioner has paid an

amount of Rs.3,17,000/- as directed by the respondent bank to renew the overdraft facility.

The learned counsel for the respondent bank states that he has no instruction as to

whether the account can be renewed. It is submitted that the total outstanding liability as

on 25-07-2022 is Rs.10,99,900/-

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the

fact that the sale which was scheduled on 29-07-2022 did not take place, this writ petition

is disposed of directing the competent authority of the respondent bank to take a decision

on the question as to whether the overdraft facility of the petitioner can be renewed and if

so, on what terms. To enable consideration of the same the petitioner to approach the

competent authority of the respondent with a suitable proposal within a period of 2 weeks

from today. If such proposal is filed at a time specified above any proceedings to bring the

properties of the petitioner to sale will be initiated only after taking a decision on the

proposal to be submitted by the petitioner.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE AMG

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22323/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE E-AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 27.06.2022 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER