Kerala High Court
Rajeev.K.V vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd ... on 3 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13341 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 RAJEEV.K.V
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O VASUDEVAN
KANIMANGALATH HOUSE, ANTHIKKAD P.O
THRISSUR DISTRICT-, PIN - 680641
2 SMITHA RAJEEV
AGED 45 YEARS
W/O RAJEEV.K.V
KANIMANGALATH HOUSE, ANTHIKKAD P.O
THRISSUR DISTRICT-, PIN - 680641
BY ADVS.
K.M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN
MANUMON A.
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD (KERALA BANK).
REGIONAL OFFICE, SAHAKARANA SADABDI MANDIRAM,
KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, THRISSUR,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
PIN - 680010
2 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
ANTHIKKAD BRANCH
ANTHIKKAD P O ,THRISSUR DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER., PIN - 680641
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN(STANDING COUNSEL)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.13341 Of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of April , 2024
The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Kerala State Co-operative Bank 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 ₹12 lakhs towards Housing Loan in
the year 2017 and ₹2.25 lakhs towards Covid Suraksha Loan
in the year 2022 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 due to
financial stringency. The repayment of loan fell into arrears. It
happened due to reasons beyond the control of the
petitioners.
WP(C) No.13341 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.P1 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. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that
the loans were given to the petitioners in the years 2017 and
WP(C) No.13341 Of 2024
2022. The petitioners committed default in repaying the 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.P1 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 outstanding amount due to the Bank from
the petitioners as on 03.04.2024 is ₹13,99,604/- and the
WP(C) No.13341 Of 2024
overdue amount as on 03.04.2024 is ₹2,15,084/-.
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:
(i) The petitioners shall remit the over due
amount of ₹2,15,084/- in eight consecutive
and equal monthly installments along with
accruing interest and other Bank charges, if
WP(C) No.13341 Of 2024
any. First of such instalments shall be paid
on or before 03.05.2024.
(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 along with the aforesaid payments.
(iv) If the petitioners make payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
against the petitioners shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) No.13341 Of 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13341/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19-1-
2024 ISSUED BY THE 1 ST RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONERS AS PER SECTION 13(4)
OF SARFEASI ACT
