Kerala High Court
Shamila vs Canara Bank on 12 June, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 8873 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
SHAMILA
AGED 42 YEARS
PALLIVADAKATHIL,
ATTOORKONAM MURI, KARINGANOOR P.O,
VELLINALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA TALUK,
PIN - 691506
BY ADVS. VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN
B.ANUSREE
RESHMA UNNIKRISHNAN
MIRAL K.JOY
JERIN C. JOHNY
RESPONDENT:
CANARA BANK
OYOOR BRANCH, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
OFIICER., PIN - 691510
SHRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.8873/2023
-:2:-
Dated this the 12th day of June,2023
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed to direct the respondent -
Bank to permit the petitioner to pay off the outstanding
loan amount in instalments and regularise the loan
account.
2. The petitioner's case is that, she and her
husband had availed a housing loan from the respondent
- Bank - by creating an equitable mortgage.
Unfortunately, the petitioner's husband was murdered on
31.03.2021. After the death of the husband, she was
unable to pay off the instalments amount on time. The
respondent - Bank has initiated proceedings under the
Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and is
proceeding against the secured asset. The petitioner may
be permitted to pay off the outstanding amount in
instalments. Hence, the writ petition.
W.P.(C)No.8873/2023
3. When the writ petition came up for
consideration on 22.03.2023, this Court had stayed
further coercive proceedings as against the petitioner on
condition that the petitioner deposits an amount of
Rs.4,00,000/- on or before 27.04.2023.
4. Heard; Sri. Vishnu Bhuvanendran, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner and
Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent.
5. Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, on instructions,
submitted that the petitioner has not complied with the
interim direction passed by this Court on 22.03.2023.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian
Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip [2023 LiveLaw
(SC) 320], after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicial
pronouncements rendered under the Act, has
categorically declared that High Courts shall not, unless
in extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with
W.P.(C)No.8873/2023
proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002, in writ proceedings under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Having considered the pleadings and materials
on record and taking note of the fact the petitioner has
not complied with the interim order dated 22.03.2023
passed by this Court, I do not find any extra ordinary
circumstances to entertain the writ petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without
prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out her
remedies, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
DST/12.06.23 //True copy//
P.A.To Judge
W.P.(C)No.8873/2023
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE U/S 13(2) OF
THE SARFAESI ACT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED
UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT
DATED26.10.2022
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
