Kerala High Court
Arunkumar vs The Branch Manager on 12 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14005 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 ARUNKUMAR
AGED 50 YEARS
SOLE PROPRIETOR OF. M/S THANKS 4 COMING TC 1980/6 KAVYAM,
CHITRA NAGAR - 89/D3 SREECHITHRA NAGAR,
PANGODE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011
2 SARITHA ARUNKUMAR
AGED 45 YEARS
W/O .ARUNKUMAR , TC 1980/6 KAVYAM,
CHITRA NAGAR - 89/D3 SREECHITHRA NAGAR,
PANGODE THIRUVANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011
BY ADVS.
K.RAJESWARY
ANIL PRABHA.K
SURYA V.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE BRANCH MANAGER
BANK OF BARODA TC 22/1022(1) RRD COMPLEX CPGP LANE
SASTHAMANGALAM JN
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010
2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER
BANK OF BARODA PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010
SMT.R.REMA (STANDING COUNSEL)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12th day of April, 2024
The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Bank of Baroda to the petitioners, invoking the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002.
2. The Bank paid ₹15 lakhs towards Overdraft,
₹6,78,045/- towards Housing Loan and ₹11,16,000/- towards
two Gold Loans to the petitioners. The petitioners state that
though the petitioners made remittances promptly during the
initial repayment period of the financial advance, they could
not pay the repayment installments promptly later. The
repayment of loan fell into arrears. It happened due to
reasons beyond the control of the petitioners.
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
3. Though the petitioners requested the Bank to
permit the petitioners to repay the overdue amounts in easy
monthly installments, the Bank 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.P2 notice.
4. The petitioners state that they are still in a position
to clear the overdue amounts towards the loan, if sufficient
time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly installments. If
the respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive
proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the
petitioners, they will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of
the Bank and denied all the statements made by the
petitioners. The petitioners committed default in repaying the
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
loan.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioners and
required them to clear the dues. The petitioners deliberately
omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other
go than to proceed against the petitioners invoking the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002. The impugned Ext.P2 notice was issued in these
circumstances. The petitioners have not advanced any legal
reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the
Bank.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if
the petitioners are ready and willing to make a substantial
payment soon and remit the balance overdue amount
immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted
to the petitioners to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the total outstanding amount due to the Bank
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
from the petitioners as on 17.03.2024 is ₹34,16,000/-. The
outstanding amount towards Overdraft alone as on
17.03.2024 is ₹15,15,580/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and the
Standing Counsel representing the Bank.
9. The specific case of the petitioners is that the
petitioners have 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
petitioners. The petitioners have provided substantial security
which will safeguard the interest of the Bank.
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 petitioners to clear off the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the
following directions:
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
(i) The petitioners shall remit the
outstanding amount of ₹15,15,580/- towards
Overdraft in 10 consecutive and equal
monthly installments along with accruing
interest and other Bank charges, if any. First
of such installments shall be paid on or
before 13.05.2024.
(ii) If the petitioners commit default in
making payments as directed above, the
respondents will be at liberty to continue with
the coercive proceedings against the
petitioners in accordance with law.
(iii) The petitioners shall also pay current
EMIs towards Housing Loan along with the
aforesaid payments.
(iv) If the petitioners make payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
against the petitioners shall stand deferred.
(v) The petitioners may approach the
respondents for regularisation of loan
account after clearing the outstanding
amount towards the Overdraft.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) No.14005 Of 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14005/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OF WRIT
PETITION © NO. 17316 OF 2023 DATED
13/07/2023
Exhibit-P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER THE
SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT 2002
DATED 8/02/2024
Exhibit-P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
12.03.2024
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER SENT BY
THE RESPONDENT DATED 21/03/2024
