Vipin Jomy vs The South Indian Bank Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 394 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

          WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 21ST POUSHA, 1944

                              WP(C) NO. 39025 OF 2022

PETITIONER:

              VIPIN JOMY
              AGED 36 YEARS

              S/O JOMY,
              KULAMKUTHIYIL, THAVUKUNNU,
              NEW NADUVIL, KANNUR. , PIN - 670582
              BY ADVS.
              S.MUMTAZ
              AMINA RUBY FAIZAL
              AJITH M. JIJI
              ALISHA ASLAM


RESPONDENT:

              THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
              REP BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
              REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR,
              KVR TOWER, PAMPAN MADHAVAN ROAD,
              TALAP, KANNUR. , PIN - 670002
              BY ADVS.
              SUNIL SHANKER
              VIDYA GANGADHARAN(K/000424/2020)
              SANDHRA.S(K/001610/2021)



      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P. (C) No. 39025 of 2022
                                       ..2..




                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this court challenging

the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the

provisions of the SARFAESI Act to recover amounts due

under a Kisan Cash Credit Overdraft facility availed by

the petitioner from the respondent bank.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner would submit that the proceedings are at the

stage of possession and the petitioner may be permitted

to clear the liability in instalments.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent

bank submits that the liability is huge and therefore, the

respondent bank cannot be permitted the petitioner to

clear the liability in instalments. It is submitted that

since the proceedings are only at the stage of symbolic

possession, the petitioner has sufficient time to challenge

the proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal by

filing a Securitization Application under Section 17 of the W.P. (C) No. 39025 of 2022 ..3..

SARFAESI Act.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the

respondent bank, and considering that the steps are only

at the stage of symbolic possession interference is

refused under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

and the petitioner is permitted to agitate all grievances

before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

The Writ Petition is dismissed as above. It will be

always open to the petitioner to approach the bank for

reasonable accommodation, notwithstanding the

dismissal of this Writ Petition.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE RMV W.P. (C) No. 39025 of 2022 ..4..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39025/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION NOTICE SENT BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 12/9/2022. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 11/11/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A.TO JUDGE