Sajimon.S vs The Authorized Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 12421 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 12421 Ker
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2023

Kerala High Court

Sajimon.S vs The Authorized Officer on 22 November, 2023

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1945
                      WP(C) NO. 38647 OF 2023
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT MC 437/2023 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL
                         MAGISTRATE ,KOLLAM
PETITIONER:

          SAJIMON.S
          AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.SASI,
          THAMARASSERIL HOUSE, ALAPPADU,
          CHERIYAZHEEKKAL, KARUNAGAPPALLY,
          KOLLAM, PIN - 690 573.

          BY ADVS.
               PRATHEESH.P
               ANJANA KANNATH


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
          MANAPPURAM HOME FINANCE LTD., 5TH FLOOR,
          MANAPPURAM HOUSE, VALAPAD, THRISSUR,
          PIN - 680 567.

    2     THE BRANCH MANAGER
          MANAPPURAM HOME FINANCE LTD., 1ST FLOOR,
          LOGOS CENTER, LOGOS JUNCTION,
          NEAR PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KOTTAYAM,
          PIN - 686 001.

          BY ADVS.
               C.HARIKUMAR
               SANDRA SUNNY(K/926/2020)
               ARUN KUMAR M.A(K/1197/2021)
               FARAH JYOTHI PRADEEP(K/1240/2023)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.38647 of 2023
                                :2:




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2023

The petitioner has approached this Court

aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of

financial advance made by the respondents to the petitioner,

invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. The respondents paid ₹7,00,000/- to the petitioner

as Home Loan in the year 2022. 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. It happened due to

reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.

3. Though the petitioner requested the respondents

to permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy

monthly instalments, the respondent 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 and P3

notices.

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. Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the

respondents 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 2022. The

petitioner committed default in repaying the loan.

6. The respondents repeatedly reminded the

petitioner and required him to clear the dues. The petitioner

deliberately omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the

respondents 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 Exts.P1 and P3

were issued in these circumstances. The petitioner has not

advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive

proceedings initiated by the respondents.

7. The Counsel, however, submitted that if the

petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment

soon and remit the balance outstanding amount immediately

thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the

petitioner to clear the dues. The Counsel submitted that the

closure amount due to the respondents from the petitioner as

on 21.11.2023 is ₹9,36,078/-.

8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Counsel representing the respondents.

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 respondents.

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 the closure

amount of ₹9,36,078/- in 10 equal and

consecutive monthly installments along with

accruing interest and other administrative

charges, if any.

(ii) First of such installment shall be paid

on or before 22.12.2023.

(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.