Muhammed Asharaf C.P vs Authorized Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 9432 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                   &
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
     MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 13TH BHADRA, 1945
                          WA NO. 1505 OF 2023
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 25844/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF
                                KERALA
APPELLANT:

             MUHAMMED ASHARAF C.P,
             AGED 52 YEARS
             S/O PAREED PILLAI C.M, CHIRAYATH HOUSE, CHATHERIKKUDY,
             SOUTH EZHIPURAM, SOUTH VAZHAKKULAM P.O.,, PIN - 683105
             BY ADV R.DIVAKARAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1        AUTHORIZED OFFICER
             BANK OF BARODA, VYTTILA BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR WELL-
             CARE HOSPITAL, S.A ROAD, VYTTILA, PIN - 682020
    2        THE MANAGER
             BANK OF BARODA, VYTTILA BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR WELL-
             CARE HOSPITAL, S.A ROAD, VYTTILA, PIN - 682020
OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI.K.ANAND-SC


     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.09.2023,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA NO. 1505 OF 2023                      2




                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 4th day of September, 2023 ANU SIVARAMAN (J)

This writ appeal is filed against the judgment dated

07.08.2023 dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner

without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his

remedies, in accordance with law.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant

that he had availed a loan from Vijaya Bank, Vyttila branch and

the bank has merged with the Bank of Baroda and on default of

committing the repayment of the loan, action was initiated

under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. It is submitted that

the petitioner has approached this Court earlier and had filed

WP(c).No.31223/2022 which was disposed of on 17/10/2022

with a direction to the Bank to permit the petitioner to

repayments of 15 monthly installments. It is stated that the

petitioner was unable to make the payments as directed.

However, it is contended that since the property is situated in

Vazhakulam Village the value of the property is such that the

sale of 3 cents of land would be sufficient to meet the liability.

The petitioner therefore approached this Court seeking

indulgence, but the writ petition was dismissed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank

contends that in spite of directions issued by this Court on

earlier occasions, the petitioner had not taken any steps to

repay the amounts due and that no relief can be granted in the

facts and circumstances of the case.

4. Having considered the contentions advanced, we find

that in view of the admitted facts and circumstances available in

this case and in view of the decision of the Apex Court in South

Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip [2023 SCC

Online SC 435] and in various decisions to the same effect

this Court would not be justified and interfered in this matter.

In the above view of the matter, this writ appeal is

dismissed, however, without prejudice to the right of the

petitioner to avail statutory remedy available, if any, or to

approach the Bank for any relief that the bank may be willing to

offer.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Sd/-

C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE ska