Kerala High Court
Thajunesa vs The Authorized Officer on 1 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 20642 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
THAJUNESA
AGED 69 YEARS
W/O LATE SHARFUDHEEN, 292, HASARATH MANZIL,
PALLAM MUTHALAMADA POST, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678507
BY ADVS.
PRAVEEN K. JOY
T.A.JOY
E.S.SANEEJ
M.P.UNNIKRISHNAN
M.K.SAMYUKTHA
N.ABHILASH
BEENA JOSEPH
DEEPU RAJAGOPAL
SANDRA S.KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, PALAKKAD BRANCH,
PALAKAD-678001.
2 BRANCH MANAGER,
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,PALAKKAD BRANCH,
PALAKAD-678001.
3 ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER,
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,REGIONAL OFFICE, M G ROAD,
ERNAKULAM-682016
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. SUNIL SHANKER (SC)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.20642/2022
-:2:-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court being
aggrieved by proceedings initiated by the 1 st respondent
under the provisions of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act) for recovery of
amounts due from the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that on an earlier occasion, the petitioner had been
given an opportunity to clear the entire liability by paying a
sum of Rs.11,00,000/-(Rupees Eleven Lakhs Only) and the
petitioner had paid an amount of Rs.2,10,000/-(Rupees Two
Lakhs Ten Thousand Only) towards the One Time
Settlement but could not comply with the terms of the One
Time Settlement because of financial difficulties. It is
submitted that the loan in question is an agricultural loan.
It is submitted that if the petitioner is given yet another
chance to clear the liability, she will be in a position to
W.P.(C) No.20642/2022
settle the liability.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondent Bank submits that the earlier One Time
Settlement proposal had been cancelled on account of non-
compliance. It is submitted that if the petitioner files a
fresh proposal with the respondent Bank, the same can be
considered as per the norms of the Bank.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
points out that the petitioner has also complied with the
interim order issued by this Court on 29-06-2022, and a
further amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakhs Only)
has been paid to the respondent Bank.
5. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and taking
into consideration of the submission of the learned counsel
for the respondent Bank, this writ petition will stand
disposed of, directing that if the petitioner submits a fresh
proposal for settlement to the 1 st respondent within a
period of 10 days from today, the 1st respondent or any
competent authority of the respondent Bank shall take a
W.P.(C) No.20642/2022
decision on the said proposal and till such time a decision
is taken, further coercive steps against the petitioner shall
kept in abeyance.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ats
W.P.(C) No.20642/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20642/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEATH
CERTIFICATE DATED 13.7.16 OF REGISTRAR
OF BIRTH AND DEATH, MUTHALAMADA GRAMA
PANCHAYATH.
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
26.03.2019 IN WPC 9260/2019 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED
BY THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA DATED
08.04.2019.
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
WPC 22388 /2019 DATED 19.08.2019.
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR
RS. 50000/-DATED 30.03.2022.
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR
RS. 50000/-DATED 31.03.2022.
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT
DATED 18.06.2022.
Exhibit P8 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE NOTICE
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
13.06.2022.
Exhibit P9 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 17.06.2022.
