Kerala High Court
Kunhikannan P vs Kerala Gramin Bank on 21 December, 2023
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 43183 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
KUNHIKANNAN P
AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIKKUTTY, VARAYALIL,
VALAYAM (PO), KOZHIKODE - 673517., PIN - 673517
BY ADVS.
C.BHASKARAN
VISHNU C. BHASKAR
ARJUN C BHASKAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA GRAMIN BANK
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER, KGB TOWERS,
A K ROAD, P.O.MALAPPURAM , PIN-676505.
2 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER,KERALA GRAMIN BANK,
P.O.MALAPPURAM, PIN-676505., PIN - 676505
SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.43183 of 2023
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of December, 2023
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Kerala Gramin 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 made financial advances to the petitioner
as Housing Loan, Agricultural Term Loan and Kisan Cash
Credit Loan in the year 2016. 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 due to health
issues and impact of Covid-19 pandemic. The repayment of
loans fell into arrears later. 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 Exts.P1 and P2 notices.
4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to
clear the overdue amounts towards the loans, 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. Standing 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 loans were given to the petitioner in the year 2016. The
petitioner committed default in repaying the loans.
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 Exts.P1 and P2 were issued in these
circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal
reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the
Bank.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if
the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial
payment soon and remit the balance outstanding and overdue
amount immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be
granted to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing
Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount due to the
Bank from the petitioner towards Kisan Credit Card Loan as
on 21.12.2023 is ₹26,870/- and the overdue amount towards
Housing Loan and Agricultural Term Loan as on 21.12.2023 is
₹2,30,000/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the
Standing 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
loans 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 the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the
following directions:
(i) The petitioner shall remit the overdue
amount of ₹2,30,000/- towards Housing Loan
and Agricultural Term Loan and outstanding
amount of ₹26,870/- towards Kisan Credit
Card Loan in eight consecutive and equal
monthly instalments. First of such
instalments shall be paid on or before
22.01.2024.
(ii) The petitioner shall remit the balance
overdue amount and outstanding amount in
subsequent consecutive seven equal
monthly instalments thereafter, along with
accruing interest and other Bank charges, if
any.
(iii) If the petitioner commits any default in
making payments as directed above, the
respondents will be at liberty to continue with
the coercive proceedings against the
petitioner in accordance with law.
(iv) The petitioner shall also pay current
EMIs of Housing Loan and Agricultural Term
Loan along with the aforesaid payments.
(v) If the petitioner makes payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
spk
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 43183/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE
UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI
ACT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
07.08.2023
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE
UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI
ACT PUBLISHED IN THE DAILY NEWSPAPER
DATED 10.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
