Lyju C. P vs Axis Bank Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 12758 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 12758 Ker
Judgement Date : 8 December, 2023

Kerala High Court

Lyju C. P vs Axis Bank Ltd on 8 December, 2023

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
                    WP(C) NO. 40245 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         LYJU C. P.
         AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. PETER, CHERUVALLY (H),
         SNDP, KUMBALANGHI P.O., ERNAKULAM,
         PIN - 682 007.

         BY ADVS.
              DENU JOSEPH
              MUHISEENA.V.Z
              MANJU M.K.


RESPONDENT:

    1    AXIS BANK LTD.,
         RAC, 5TH FLOOR, CHICAGO PLAZA,
         RAJAJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM ,
         REPRESENTED BY SENIOR MANAGER,
         PIN - 682 035.

    2    THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, AXIS BANK LTD.,
         RAC, 5TH FLOOR, CHICAGO PLAZA,
         RAJAJI ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 035.

         BY ADV
              SAJU N.A

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.40245 of 2023
                                 :2:




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of December, 2023

The petitioner has approached this Court

aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of

financial advance made by the Axis Bank to the petitioner,

invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. The Bank paid ₹10,32,188/- to the petitioner as

Housing Loan in the year 2015. The petitioner states that

though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the

initial repayment period of the financial advance, he could not

pay the repayment instalments promptly later. The

repayment of loan/advance fell into arrears later due to

Covid-19 pandemic. It happened due to reasons beyond the

control of the petitioner.

3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to

permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy

monthly instalments, the Bank authorities were not yielding.

The authorities, instead, started coercive proceedings,

invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Security Interest

(Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and issued Ext.P1 notice.

4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to

clear the overdue amounts towards the loan, if sufficient time

is given to clear the dues in easy monthly instalments. If the

respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive

proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the

petitioner, he will be put to untold hardship and loss.

5. Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the

Bank and denied all the statements made by the petitioner.

On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the loan

was given to the petitioner in the year 2015. The petitioner

committed default in repaying the loan.

6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and

required him to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately

omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no

other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking, the

provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002. The impugned Ext.P1 was issued in these

circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal

reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the

Bank.

7. The Counsel, however, submitted that if the

petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment

soon and remit the balance overdue amount immediately

thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the

petitioner to clear the dues. The Counsel submitted that the

outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioner as

on 30.11.2023 is ₹11,45,974/- and the overdue amount is

₹1,56,689/-.

8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Counsel representing the Bank.

9. The specific case of the petitioner is that the

petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining

the loan account initially. The default in repayment of the

loan occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the

petitioner. The petitioner has provided substantial security

which will safeguard the interest of the Bank.

10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am

inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving a short and

reasonable time to the petitioner to clear off his liability.

11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the

following directions:

(i) The petitioner shall remit the overdue

amount of ₹1,56,689/- in 12 equal and

consecutive monthly instalments along with

accruing interest and other Bank charges, if

any.

(ii) First of such instalment shall be paid

on or before 08.01.2024.

(iii) If the petitioner commits default in

making payments as directed above, the

respondents will be at liberty to continue

with coercive proceedings against the

petitioner in accordance with law.

(iv) The petitioner shall also pay current

EMIs along with the aforesaid payments.

(v) If the petitioner pays the instalments as

directed above, any coercive proceedings

against the petitioner shall stand deferred.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE AMR

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40245/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE 13 (2) NOTICE DATED 16.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PAGE OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT DATED 22.11.2023 GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit.P3 TRUE COPY THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED THROUGH E-MAIL TO THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 25.11.2023 REQUESTING TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS BY THE PETITIONER.