Muhammad Ikbal vs M/S Omkara Assets Reconstruction ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7378 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
     TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1945
                      WP(C) NO. 20998 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          MUHAMMAD IKBAL
          AGED 48 YEARS
          PROPRIETOR M/S SAID AND COMPANY ASSOCIATES, RESIDING
          AT PUTHUKULANGARA HOUSE, PILASSERY, KUNNAMANGALAM,
          KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673571

          BY ADVS.     P.JERIL BABU
                       V.NAMITHA
                       SRINATH GIRISH
                       PRASUDHA.S
                       SHRUTHI MANOHAR


RESPONDENT:

          M/S OMKARA ASSETS RECONSTRUCTION PVT LTD
          C/515, KANAKA ZILLION, JUNCTION OF LBS ROAD ANDCST
          ROAD, BKC ANNEXE, NEAR EQUINOX, KURLA (WEST),
          MUMBAI , REP. BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER, PIN - 400070

          BY ADV RENJITH.R

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.20998/2023

                                       -:2:-




                       Dated this the 27th day of June,2023

                             JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed, inter alia, to direct the

respondent to permit the petitioner to avail the One

Time Settlement(OTS) scheme.

2. The petitioner's case is that he had availed

financial assistance from the IndusInd Bank by

creating an equitable mortgage of his and his wife's

properties. The loan account was classified as a

Non-performing Asset[NPA]. The Bank has initiated

proceedings under the Securitization and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002(in short,'Act'). Although

the petitioner had approached the Bank with a request,

to avail the OTS scheme, the same was rejected. The

petitioner had filed W.P.(C)No.34282/2022 before this W.P.(C)No.20998/2023

Court, which was disposed of by Ext P3 judgment,

permitting the petitioner to pay the outstanding

amount in instalments. The petitioner could not pay

the instalments on time. Later, the Bank has assigned

the secured asset in favour of the respondent. Now,

the respondent is threatening to take possession of the

secured asset. The petitioner is willing to pay off the

entire amount through the OTS scheme. Hence, the

writ petition.

3. Heard; Sri. P. Jeril Babu, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Sri. R. Renjith, the

learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

4. Sri. R. Renjith, on instructions, submitted that

by Ext P3 judgment this Court had permitted the

petitioner to pay the outstanding amount in

instalments. The petitioner's request for OTS scheme

has already been rejected. Thus, the present writ

petition is nothing; but a sheer abuse of the process of W.P.(C)No.20998/2023

the law.

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 Act, in writ

proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

6. Having considered the pleadings and

materials on record and taking note of Ext P3 judgment

already 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.

Nonetheless, it would be up to the petitioner to work

out his remedies, in accordance with law.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without W.P.(C)No.20998/2023

prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his

remedies, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

                                  C.S.DIAS,JUDGE

DST/27.06.23                                    //True copy//

                                                P.A.To Judge
 W.P.(C)No.20998/2023






                              APPENDIX




PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1          A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22-06-2021

ISSUED BY THE INDUSIND BANK REJECTING THE OTS REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED LETTER DATED 19-10-2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURALE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P (C). 34282/2022 DATED 28-10-2022

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 16-06-2023

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL