Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

May Mary Rajesh vs The Authorized Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 8494 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8494 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 August, 2023

Kerala High Court
May Mary Rajesh vs The Authorized Officer on 7 August, 2023
               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. 23753 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

            MAY MARY RAJESH,
            AGED 44 YEARS
            W/O.RAJESH, PUTHIYAKUNNIL VEEDU, PACHALIPURAM,
            VATTANATHARA.P.O., AMBALLUR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680302
            BY ADVS.
            C.A.CHACKO
            C.M.CHARISMA
            BABU V.P.
            SALMA DILEEP
            REMYA V.A.
RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
            CANARA BANK, SACRED HEART CHURCH BUILDING,
            NADATHARA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680751
    2       THE BRANCH MANAGER
            CANARA BANK, POOCHATTY BRANCH, SACRED HEART CHURCH
            BUILDING, NADATHARA, THRISSUR, PIN - 680751
            BY ADV. M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC No.23753 of 2023
                                     2




                             C. S. DIAS, J.
                -------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No.23753 of 2023
                -------------------------
          Dated this the 07th day of August, 2023

                             JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed to direct the

respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the

outstanding amount in instalment and close the

loan account.

2. The petitioner's case is that, she had

availed financial assistance from the second

respondent bank by creating an equitable

mortgage by deposit of title deeds. Due to Covid-

19 pandemic and failure in her business, she

could not pay the instalments on time. The first

respondent has now issued Ext.P1 sale notice and

is threatening to sell the secured asset under the

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial WPC No.23753 of 2023

Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act

(in short, 'Act'). The petitioner is willing to pay

the outstanding amount in instalments and close

the loan account. Hence, the writ petition.

3. Heard; Sri.C.A.Chacko, the learned

Counsel appearing for the petitioner and

Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned

Counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, on

instructions, submitted that the petitioner had

availed three loans from the second respondent

bank. The total outstanding in respect of the

three loans comes to Rs.1,78,95,257/-. The

respondents are willing to permit the petitioner

to pay the above outstanding amount in ten

equated monthly instalments. The said

submission is recorded.

5. The learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready WPC No.23753 of 2023

to accept the above offer.

6. Having considered the pleadings and

materials on record, the submissions made by the

learned counsel appearing for the parties, the

consensus arrived at between the parties and to

provide the petitioner one last opportunity to

clear off the liability, I am inclined to exercise

the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India and entertain the writ

petition.

Resultantly, I dispose of the writ petition in

the following manner:

(i) The respondents are directed to defer

further coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1

and P2 to enable the petitioner to pay the

outstanding amount in equated monthly

instalments as stated below.

(ii) The petitioner are permitted to pay the

outstanding amount as stated above with future WPC No.23753 of 2023

interest and cost to the second respondent -

Bank - in ten equated monthly instalments

commencing from 07.09.2023.

(iii) Needless to mention, if the petitioner

commits default in the condition ordered above,

the petitioner would lose the benefit of this

judgment and the respondents would be at

liberty to proceed with recovery proceedings

from the stage it presently stands.

(iv) It is made clear that, no further

application for modification/extension of time

shall be entertained.

Sd/-

C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/07-08 WPC No.23753 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23753/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE NOTICE DATED 27/6/2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 7/7/2023 SENT BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter