Abdul Hameed Kalanad vs Authorized Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 6216 Ker

              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. 18973 OF 2023

PETITIONERS:
     1     ABDUL HAMEED KALANAD, AGED 54 YEARS
           SON OF KALANAD ABDUL KADER, SABIRA MANZIL, AYANGOL,
           KALANAD.P.O, KASARAGOD,, PIN - 671317

     2     FATHIMA SAJITHA.A, AGED 46 YEARS
           W/O.ABDUL HAMEED KALANAD ABDUL KADER, SABIRA MANZIL,
           AYANGOL, KALANAD.P.O, KASARAGOD,, PIN - 671317

     3     MARIYAM, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O.KALANAD ABDUL KADER, SABIRA
           MANZIL, AYANGOL, KALANAD.P.O, KASARAGOD, PIN -, PIN - 671317

     4     SABANA.K, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.YUNUS ALI P.S, R/AT POVVAL
           HOUSE, MULIYAR, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671542

     5     SABIRA HAKEEM, AGED 40 YEARS
           W/O.HAKEEM ISMAIL, SABIRA MANZIL, AYANGOL, KALANAD.P.O,
           KASARAGOD, PIN -, PIN - 671317

     6     IBRAHIM A.K, AGED 47 YEARS
           S/O KHADER, SABIRA MANZIL, SABIRA MANZIL, AYANGOL, KALANAD
           P.O, KASARAGOD, PIN -, PIN - 671317

     7     SHAHINA.A, AGED 35 YEARS
           W/O.ASHRAF K.A, SABIRA MANZIL, AYANGOL, KALANAD.P.O,
           KASARAGOD, PIN -, PIN - 671317

           BY ADV A.ARUNKUMAR

RESPONDENT:

           AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., REGIONAL
           OFFICE, KANNUR, K.V.R TOWER, PAMPAN MADHAVAN ROAD, TALAP,
           KANNUR, PIN -, PIN - 670002
           BY ADV SUNIL SHANKER


           SRI.P.A.AUGUSTINE


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18973 OF 2023

                             :: 2 ::



                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of June 2023

The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to

permit the petitioner to regularise the loan accounts and

pay off the overdue amount in instalments.

2. The petitioners case is that, they had availed

financial assistance from the respondent - Bank - by

creating an equitable mortgage. Due to the Covid 19

pandemic and reasons beyond their control, they could

not pay the instalments on time. Although this Court by

Ext.P1 judgment permitted the petitioners to pay off the

overdue amount in 20 equated monthly instalments

commencing from 24.4.2022, the petitioners could not

comply with the said directions. Now 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 is prepared to pay off the

outstanding amount in instalments. Hence, the writ

petition.

WP(C) NO. 18973 OF 2023

:: 3 ::

3. Heard; Sri.A.Arunkumar, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners and Sri.P.A.Augstine, the

learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

4. Sri.P.A.Augstine, on instructions, submitted that

even though this Court by Ext.P1 judgment had permitted

the petitioners to pay off the overdue amount in

instalments, they have not complied with the directions.

The respondent has already filed O.A.335/21 before the

Debt Recovery Tribunal-1. Therefore, the respondent is

not ready to permit the petitioner to pay off the overdue

amount in instalments. Hence, the writ petition may be

dismissed.

5. 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

proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of WP(C) NO. 18973 OF 2023

:: 4 ::

Security Interest Act, 2002, in writ proceedings under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Having considered the pleadings and materials

on record and taking note of the fact this Court had

already exercised its discretionary powers in favour of the

petitioner vide Ext.P1 judgment and the respondent has

already filed O.A.335/21 before the Debt Recovery

Tribunal-1, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition

by exercising the plenary powers of this Court under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Nonetheless, it

would be up to the petitioners to work out their statutory

remedies.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without

prejudice to the right of the petitioners to work out their

remedies, in accordance with law.

SD/-

C.S.DIAS JUDGE jes WP(C) NO. 18973 OF 2023

:: 5 ::

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18973/2023

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-03-2022 IN WP(C).NO.9802 OF 2022

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17-03-2023 IN CMP.NO.612 OF 2023 OF THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD