Siju vs The Kerala State Co-Op Bank Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 11446 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 11446 Ker
Judgement Date : 23 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Siju vs The Kerala State Co-Op Bank Ltd on 23 April, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
   TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 3RD VAISAKHA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024


PETITIONER:



          SIJU, AGED 45 YEARS
          S/O VAREED, MENACHERY HOUSE,
          VELLANIKKARA DESOM,
          THRISSUR DT, PIN - 680 656.
          BY ADVS.
          M.R.REENA
          P.S.SUJETH



RESPONDENT:



          THE KERALA STATE CO-OP BANK LTD.
          MANNUTHI BR , THRISSUR DT.,
          REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
          SAHAKARANA SADAPTHI MANDIRAM TUDA ROAD,
          KOVILAKATHUPADAM P.O.,
          THRIVAMBADI P.O ,
          THRISSUR DT., PIN - 680 022.

          SRI.AJITH VISWANATH, GP




THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024

                                          2




                               N. NAGARESH, J
                   ------------------------------------------------
                         W.P.(C).No.16339 of 2024
                ------------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024


                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the

coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made

by the respondent-Bank to the petitioner, invoking the

provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002.

2. The Bank paid Rs.20,00,000/-. to the petitioner as Simple

Loan in 2015 and Rs.5,00,000/- as Covid Suraksha loan in

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. WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024

3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit the

petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly

instalments, 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.P1 notice.

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 respondent

is 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. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Bank

and denied all the statements made by the petitioner. On

behalf of the respondent, it is submitted that the loan was

given to the petitioner in the years 2015 and 2022. The

petitioner committed default in repaying the loan. WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024

6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and required him

to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately omitted to do so.

In the circumstances, the Bank 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

Ext.P1 was issued in these circumstances. The petitioner has

not advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive

proceedings initiated by the Bank.

7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if the

petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment

soon and remit the overdue amount immediately thereafter, a

short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner to clear

the dues. The Standing Counsel submitted that the

outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioner as on

23.04.2024 is Rs.25,73,817/- and the overdue amount is

Rs.9,11,045/-.

8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing

Counsel representing the Bank.

WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024

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 occurred lately due to

reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. The petitioner

has 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 petitioner to clear off the liability.

11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the

following directions:

(i) The petitioner shall remit the overdue

amount of Rs.9,11,045/- in 10 equal monthly

instalments, along with accruing interest and

other Bank charges, if any. The first instalment

shall be paid on or before 23.05.2024.

(ii) 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 WP(C) NO. 16339 OF 2024

accordance with law.