Rajitha vs The Kerala Gramin Bank
2022 Latest Caselaw 6644 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
      THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                          WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              RAJITHA
              AGED 51 YEARS
              W/O. KARUNAN, EDAVALATH HOUSE,
              VISHNUMANGALAM (P.O),
              KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,PIN-673 506
              BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI)


RESPONDENT:

              THE KERALA GRAMIN BANK
              KALLACHI BRANCH, HEAD OFFICE IN MALAPPURAM,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER ,PIN-676 505

              BY ADVS.
              M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
              K.JOHN MATHAI
              JOSON MANAVALAN
              KURYAN THOMAS
              PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
              RAJA KANNAN


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022

                                2




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022

The petitioner, who has availed loans from the

respondent-Kerala Gramin Bank, is before this Court seeking

to command the respondent to permit the petitioner to pay off

the entire liability in equal monthly instalments.

2. The petitioner states that she has availed loans

granted by the respondent-Bank and due to extreme financial

difficulties, the petitioner could not remit EMIs promptly. The

petitioner had availed a loan of `5 lakhs. An immovable

property is given as mortgage. Subsequently, two other loans

amounting to `3,00,000/- and `1,00,000/- were also availed as

agricultural loans by mortgaging petitioner's gold ornaments.

3. The petitioner states that the petitioner could not

remit the instalments promptly due to acute financial problems.

The respondent, thereupon, invoked proceedings under the WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022

provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The respondent has issued

Ext.P1 notice threatening dispossession. The petitioner would

submit that if the petitioner is given a breathing time, she can

wipe off the entire liability in continuing instalments.

4. The learned Standing Counsel entered appearance

on behalf of the respondent and resisted the writ petition. The

Standing Counsel controverted all the material allegations

made by the petitioner in the writ petition. The petitioner had

availed more than one loan and has deliberately defaulted in

making repayments. The petitioner repeatedly was required to

pay off the liabilities. The petitioner, however, did not pay the

EMIs. In such circumstances, the respondent had no other

way than to initiate proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.

Ext.P1 is legal and proper and is not liable to be set aside,

contended the Standing Counsel.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel representing the WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022

respondent.

6. From the pleadings and arguments, it is discernible

that the petitioner, who has availed loans from the respondent-

Bank, has been making remittances at the initial stage.

According to the petitioner, it is only because of extreme

financial problems that is faced by her family that the amount

could not be repaid promptly. Taking into consideration the

entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the

opinion that the petitioner should be permitted to clear the dues

in instalments as directed below:

(1) The petitioner shall remit an amount of `2,00,000/-, within

a period of one month from today.

(2) The balance amount along with accrued interest and

other charges, if any, shall be paid by the petitioner in the

subsequent ten consecutive equal monthly instalments.

(3) If the petitioner remits the amount as directed above, the

respondent shall defer coercive proceedings, if any, WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022

against the petitioner and her sureties.

(4) If the petitioner commits default in making any of the

remittances as directed above, the respondent will be at

liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance

with law.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) NO. 1509 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1509/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.12.2021 RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL