Sathisha.P vs The Manager
2022 Latest Caselaw 11298 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
   FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 38943 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          SATHISHA.P
          AGED 38 YEARS, S/O PAKEERA PATTALI,
          PELTHADKA HOUSE, KODIYAMME, KUMBALA.P.O,
          KASARAGOD, NOW RESIDING AT NAIKKAP HOUSE,
          EDANAD.P.O, NEAR PRASAD OIL MILL,
          KASARGODE, PIN - 671321

          BY ADV MAYA M.



RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE MANAGER
          KERALA GRAMIN BANK,
          KUMBALA BRANCH, KUMBALA, KASARGOD, PIN - 671321

    2     AUTHORISED OFFICER
          KERALA GRAMIN BANK,
          (CHIEF MANAGER SP.NO.3500)
          KUMBALA BRANCH, KUMBALA,
          KASARGOD, PIN - 671321

          BY ADV JAWAHAR JOSE




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P (C) No.38943/2022                        -2-

                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner availed two loans. Both of which are stated to be housing loans.

Petitioner has approached this Court challenging proceedings initiated under the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest

Act (hereinafter referred to as the Securitisation Act) for recovery of the amounts due from

the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank states that since a

suit was already filed and the same has been decreed, it is not possible to regularise the

loan accounts. It is submitted that the total outstanding in respect of the both loans is

Rs.10,33,440/-

3. Faced with the situation the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

states that the petitioner has filed Ext.P2 application for one time settlement and that may

be directed to be considered by the competent authority of the respondent bank.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel

for the respondent bank. Considering the limited nature of the relief now sought for by the

petitioner, this writ petition will stand disposed directing that Ext.P2 application filed by

the petitioner for one time settlement shall be considered by the competent authority of

the respondent bank and decision shall be taken thereon and communicated to the

petitioner. This shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a

certified copy of this judgment. Till such time as orders are passed on Ext.P2 further

proceedings under the SARFAESI Act shall be kept in abeyance.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE AMG

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38943/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 08.11.2022

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS DATED 23.11.2022