Sebastian Mathew vs Idbi Bank Limited
2022 Latest Caselaw 1720 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 27TH MAGHA, 1943

                     OP (DRT) NO. 140 OF 2022

 AGAINST SA 39/2022 OF DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER:

            SEBASTIAN MATHEW
            AGED 58 YEARS,S/O. MATHEW O.D.,
            ODUVELIL HOUSE,
            KARTHAVUMPADI POST, VALAYANCHIRANGARA,
            PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-683 556,
            PRESENTLY RESIDING AT EMS COLONY,
            PARA ROAD, KANJICODE,
            PALAKKAD, PIN-678 621
            BY SMT. LALY VINCENT


RESPONDENTS:

    1       IDBI BANK
            REGIONAL OFFICE, IDBI BANK BUILDING,
            PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 036,
            REPRESENTED ITS MANAGER
    2       THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER OF LOANS,
            IDBI BANK, PERUMBAVOOR BRANCH,
            ERNAKULAM, PIN-683 542
    3       THE MANAGER,
            IDBI BANK LTD, PERUMABVOOR BRANCH,
            ERNAKULAM, PIN-683 542


            ADV.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY



     THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION     ON   16.02.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(DRT) No.140/22              -:2:-




                   BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                    --------------------------------
                     O.P.(DRT) No.140 of 2022
                   ---------------------------------
               Dated this the 16th day of February, 2022

                             JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges Ext.P7 sale notice dated 17.01.2022.

According to the petitioner, he has already preferred an

application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal as S.A. No.39 of

2022 challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent

bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial

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

'the Act'). However, having regard to the present circumstances,

petitioner has offered to clear the overdue liability for the

purpose of avoiding the proposed sale.

2. Sri.P.Paulochan Antony, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the respondents, upon instructions, submitted that, the

respondent bank is willing to defer the sale for a short period,

provided petitioner clears the entire overdue amount in a time

bound manner.

3. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the respondents as recorded above, I am of the view that the

sale proposed as per Ext.P7 ought to be stayed.

4. Accordingly, there will be a stay of the sale proposed as

per Ext.P7 for a period of three months on condition that

petitioner deposits the entire overdue amount of Rs.7,80,878/-

due as on 16.02.2022 on or before 30.03.2021. If the petitioner

deposits the said amount within the time stipulated, the

respondent bank shall regularise the loan account of the

petitioner. On the other hand, if the petitioner fails to make the

said deposit, the respondents are free to proceed in accordance

with Ext.P7. The respondents shall furnish a statement of

accounts to the petitioner, within a period of 15 days from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The original petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 140/2022

PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.107/1/14 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 04.12.2021 EXHIBIT P4 THE PAPER PUBLICATION IN MANGALAM DAILY ON 09.12.2021 UNDER SECTION 13 (4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 08.11.2021 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 19.11.2021 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER