Kerala High Court
Georgekutty Thomas 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. 43310 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
GEORGEKUTTY THOMAS
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O THOMAS, PULIYURUMBIL HOUSE,
CHUNDAKUNNU P.O, ERUVESSI AMSOM,
CHEMPERI (VIA), KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670632
BY ADVS.
V.T.MADHAVANUNNI
V.A.SATHEESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA GRAMIN BANK
ERUVESSI BRANCH, CHEMPERI P.O,
KANNUR DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, PIN - 670631
2 AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER SARFAESI ACT
KERALA GRAMIN BANK, KANNUR REGIONAL OFFICE,
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670004
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.43310 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 Kisan Credit Card Loan, Agricultural Term Loan, Housing
Loan and Additional Housing Loan in the year 2009. 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 Covid-19 pandemic. The repayment of
loan 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 Ext.P1 notice.
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 2009. 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 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 Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if
the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial
payment soon and remit the balance outstanding / 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 is
₹3,39,744/-, Agricultural Term Loan is ₹2,52,566/- and
Housing Loan is ₹1,84,310/- as on 21.12.2022 and the
overdue amount towards Additional Housing Loan is
₹1,84,310/- as on 21.12.2023.
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
outstanding amount of Kisan Credit Card
Loan of ₹3,39,744/-, Agricultural Term Loan
of ₹2,52,566/- and Housing Loan of
₹1,84,310/- and overdue amount of
Additional Housing Loan of ₹1,10,384/- in 12
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
outstanding amount in subsequent
consecutive 11 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 Additional Housing 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) 43310/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SAID POSSESSION
NOTICE DATED 13/12/2023 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2
