Mr.Satheesan. K vs State Bank Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 8426 Ker

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
         MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1945
                           WP(C) NO. 25708 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:

     1      MR.SATHEESAN. K
            AGED 54 YEARS
            S/O KESAVAN NADAR,
            TC 20/1721, KESAVAN BHAVAN KATTAMVILLA,
            THAMALAM, POOJAPURA P.O.,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695015
     2      MRS.BINDU.V.
            W/O SATHEESAN K.
            TC 20/1721, KESAVAN BHAVAN KATTAMVILLA,
            THAMALAM, POOJAPURA P.O,
            THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695015
            BY ADVS.
            LEGY ABRAHAM
            ABE RAJAN

RESPONDENTS:

     1      STATE BANK OF INDIA
            SME THIRUVANATHAPURAM BRANCH,
            ANDOOR BUILDING, GENERAL HOSPITAL,
            VANCHIYOOR PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
            REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER
     2      STATE BANK OF INDIA
            VIKAS BHAWAN BRANCH,
            LMS COMPOUND, VIKAS BHAWAN PO.,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
            BY ADVS.
            SRI TOM K THOMAS
            SHRI.JITHESH MENON, SC, SBI

     THIS   WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
07.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC No.25708 of 2023
                                   2




                             C. S. DIAS, J.
                 -------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No.25708 of 2023
                 -------------------------
          Dated this the 07th day of August, 2023

                             JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed to quash Exts.P6 and

P7 notice issued by the second respondent bank

under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act (in short,

'Act').

2. The petitioners' case is that, they are

husband and wife. The first petitioner is a

contractor and the second petitioner is a home

maker. They had availed a housing loan from the

second respondent on 04.07.2013 by creating an

equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds. The

first petitioner had availed financial assistance WPC No.25708 of 2023

and was doing certain contract work. Now, the

respondents have issued a notice under Section

13(2) of the Act, which shows that no amount was

deposited towards the housing loan account. In

fact, the second respondent has sanctioned a

working capital loan of Rs.20/- lakh. Although the

petitioners voluntarily agreed to pay the overdue

amount, the respondents have invoked Section

13(4) of the Act and have issued Exts.P6 and P7

and are threatening to take physical possession

of the secured asset. The action of the

respondents is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the

writ petition.

3. Heard; Sri.Legy Abraham, the learned

Counsel appearing for the petitioners and

Sri.Tom K. Thomas, the learned Counsel

appearing for the respondents.

4. Sri.Tom K. Thomas, on instructions,

submitted that the total outstanding amount as WPC No.25708 of 2023

on 19.07.2023 is Rs.1,81,19,017/-. The financial

assistance availed by the petitioners was a cash

credit facility. The same has been recalled and

the account has been classified as Non

Performing Asset. Due to the enormous amount

that is due from the petitioner, the respondents

are not willing to extend any instalment facility to

the petitioners. The petitioners may be relegated

to exhaust their statutory remedies.

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in South

Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip

(2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320), after adverting to a

myriad of earlier judicial pronouncements

rendered under the Act, has categorically

declared that High Courts shall not, unless in

extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with

proceedings initiated under the Act, in writ

proceedings under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India.

WPC No.25708 of 2023

6. Having considered the pleadings and

materials on record and after appreciating the

rival submissions across the Bar, I am of the

definite view that there are no extraordinary

circumstances made out to entertain the writ

petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India. Nonetheless, it will be upto the

petitioners to workout their statutory remedies,

in accordance with law.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed

without prejudice to the right of the petitioner

to workout their statutory remedies, in

accordance with law.

Sd/-

C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/07-08 WPC No.25708 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25708/2023

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.05.2023 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.05.2023 ISSUED TO THE SECOND PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 13(2)OF SARFAESI ACT EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE SENT THROUGH THE LAWYER DATED 27.06.2023 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 24.06.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE OF THE REPLY NOTICE SENT THROUGH THE LAWYER DATED 30.06.2023 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ABOVE NOTICES DATED 19.07.2023 UNDER SECTION 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY HAVING ND EXTENT OF 1.99 ARE EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ABOVE NOTICES DATED 19.07.2023 UNDER SECTION 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI ACT WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY HAVING AN EXTENT OF 2.02 ARE EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF ACCOUNT DETAILS FROM 30.09.2021 TO 19.07.2023 IN RESPECT OF A/C NO.40476738209 WITH 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE