Kerala High Court
Jayalakshmi C.V vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Its ... 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. 15336 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
JAYALAKSHMI C.V
AGED 40 YEARS,
D/O CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI N,
MULLASSERY VEEDU, ELAMPAL P.O.,
PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 691322.
BY ADVS.
SHERRY J. THOMAS
JOEMON ANTONY
ANTONY NILTON REMELO
GOKUL DEVIS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO
DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE
GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
SOCIETIES, JAWAHAR SAHAKARANA BHAVAN,
DPI JUNCTION, THYCAUD P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -, PIN - 695014.
3 THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT
REGISTRAR-CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL),
PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM, KERALA - 689695.
W.P.(C)No.15336 of 2024
:2:
4 THE ELMPAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD;
NO.604, ELAMPAL - NARIKKAL ROAD,
ELAMPAL, VILAKKUDY, KOLLAM, KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 691322.
5 ARBITRATOR -CUM - SPECIAL SALE OFFICER
ELAMPAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD;
NO.604.,ELAMPAL - NARIKKAL ROAD, ELAMPAL,
VILAKKUDY, KOLLAM, KERALA - 691322.
BY ADVS.
SMT. DEEPA V, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.15336 of 2024
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the State Bank of India 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 ₹10 lakhs to the petitioner as Term
Loan in the year 2016. The petitioner states that though the
petitioner made remittances promptly during the initial
repayment period of the financial advance, she could not pay
the repayment instalments promptly later due to unforeseen
circumstances. The repayment of loan fell into arrears. It
happened due to reasons beyond the control of the
petitioner.
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.P2 notice.
4. The petitioner states that she 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, she 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 respondents, it is submitted that
the loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2016. The
petitioner committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and
required her 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.P2 notice 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 remit the balance
outstanding amount in instalments, 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
₹21,78,074/-.
8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Standing Counsel representing the Bank.
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
outstanding amount of ₹21,78,074/- in 12
equal and consecutive 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 accordance with law.
(iii) If the petitioner makes payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ams
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15336/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE
NUMBER 49/2023 DATED 15.02.2023 ISSUED
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 30/03/2024
Exhibit P3A THE TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 30/03/2024
