Anju T George vs Authorised Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 7949 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
                   WP(C) NO. 20661 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

         ANJU T GEORGE
         AGED 28 YEARS
         THADATHIL HOUSE VANIAMPARA P.O. THRISSUR
         DISTRICT, PIN - 680652
         BY ADVS.
         SAIJO HASSAN
         BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
         RAFEEK. V.K.
         P.K.ANTONY
         AATHIRA SUNNY
         N.KRISHNA OZHAKKANAT

RESPONDENT:

         AUTHORISED OFFICER
         STATE BANK OF INDIA
         ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH
         R.S.BUILDINGS OPP.MAHARAJAS COLLEGE GROUND,
         ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011


         ADV.JITHESH MENON, SC


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.20661/2022
                                 2



                        JUDGMENT

Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022

The petitioner states that her mother availed a housing

loan for an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from the State Bank of

India in the year June 2013. The petitioner stood as a surety.

The loan was sanctioned for a period of 20 years.

2. The petitioner's mother has been remitting

substantial amounts towards repayment of loan.

Subsequently, due to Covid-19 pandemic and consequential

financial depression, the remittances were defaulted and the

respondent initiated proceedings invoking the provisions of

the SARFAESI Act.

3. The petitioner states that if she is granted a

reasonable time, the entire outstanding arrears can be

remitted back. The respondent has put the residential house

of the petitioner to auction, as per Ext.P1. The petitioner,

therefore, prays that the respondent be directed to regularize W.P.(C) No.20661/2022

the loan account and permit the petitioner to remit the

outstanding amount in instalments.

4. The Standing Counsel entered appearance and

resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel controverted

all the material allegations made by the petitioner. It is

pointed out that since the loan account of the petitioner has

already been recalled, there is no question of regularization

of loan. The respondent has moved the Debt Recovery

Tribunal (DRT) filing O.A.No.252/2021. In such

circumstances, unless the petitioner pays the entire

outstanding arrears, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

According to the Standing Counsel, the total outstanding

amount from the petitioner is Rs.35,45,728/- as on

17.05.2022.

5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

6. The request of the petitioner is to permit the

petitioner to clear the outstanding arrears and regularize the W.P.(C) No.20661/2022

loan account. However, on the basis of the submission

made on behalf of the respondent that the loan account has

been recalled and an O.A. No.252/2021 has been filed

before the DRT, the respondent cannot be compelled to

regularize the loan account of the petitioner.

7. From the pleadings in the writ petition and

arguments raised at the Bar, it is seen that the petitioner's

mother has been remitting Equated Monthly Instalments

earlier. The default was only due to Covid-19 pandemic and

consequential financial depression. In the special

circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that a

reasonable time should be granted to the petitioner to clear

the entire outstanding amount so as to save the residential

house of the petitioner.

8. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed

of with following directions:

(1) The petitioner shall remit the entire outstanding

dues along with accruing interest and other charges, if any, W.P.(C) No.20661/2022

to the respondent in 12 equal monthly instalments.

(2) The first instalment shall be paid on or before

31.07.2022 and the remaining instalments shall be paid in

the ensuing consecutive months.

(3) If the petitioner commits any default in making

payments as directed above, the respondent will be at liberty

to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.

(4) If the petitioner makes remittance as directed

above, all coercive proceedings against the petitioner and

her mother shall stand deferred.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE AJ W.P.(C) No.20661/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20661/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES DATED 18.05.2022 ALONG WITH LEGIBLE COPY ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT