Hazeeb P A vs Guruvayur Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 13478 Ker

Kerala High Court

Hazeeb P A vs Guruvayur Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd 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. 42837 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         HAZEEB P A
         AGED 34 YEARS, S/O ABDUL RAHMAN,
         PUTHUVEETIL HOUSE, KADAPPURAM,
         THRISSUR, PIN - 680 514.

         BY ADV
              JAZIL DEV FERDINANTO


RESPONDENTS:

    1    GURUVAYUR CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD
         REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED OFFICER NO.F 1652,
         GURUVAYUR, PIN - 680 101.

    2    GURUVAYUR CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD
         HEAD OFFICE BRANCH,
         REPRESENTED BY MANAGER NO.F 1652,
         GURUVAYUR, PIN - 680 101.

         BY ADVS.
              T.R.HARIKUMAR
              ARJUN RAGHAVAN(K/1277/2012)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP            FOR
ADMISSION ON 21.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME            DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.42837 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 Guruvayur Co-operative

Urban 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 ₹13 lakhs to the petitioner as

Mortgage Loan in the year 2019. 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 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. 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 loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2019. 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 Standing 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 Standing Counsel submitted

that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the

petitioner is ₹20,35,355/- and the overdue amount as on

21.12.2023 is ₹14,63,355/-.

8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner

and the learned 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

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 an amount of

₹2,00,000/- on or before 30.12.2023.

(ii) The petitioner shall remit the balance

overdue amount in subsequent consecutive

12 equal monthly instalments thereafter,

along with accruing interest and other Bank

charges, if any.

(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) 42837/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION IN CHANDRIKA NEWSPAPER DATED 30.11.2023.