Kerala High Court
Muhammed Shahid K.P vs Piramal Capital And Housing Finance 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. 13577 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
MUHAMMED SHAHID K.P, AGED 45 YEARS
S/O ALIKOYA K.P, RESIDING AT NASHWARA ISHA
MANZIL, KAKKUZHI PARAMBIL, ERAVANNUR P.O,
MADAVOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673585
BY ADVS.
ADITHYA RAJEEV
S.PARVATHI
SAFA NAVAS
RESPONDENT/S:
1 PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LTD
(FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION LTD), REGISTERED OFFICE, UNIT NO.
601, 6TH FLOOR, PIRAMAL AMITI BUILDING,
PIRAMAL AGASTYA CORPORATE PARK, KAMANI
JUNCTION, LBS MARG, KURLA (WEST), MUMBAI, PIN
- 400070
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER
PIRAMAL CAPITAL AND HOUSING FINANCE LTD
[EARLIER KNOWN AS DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION LIMITED (DHFL)], KOZHIKODE
BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, CITY MALL, KANNUR ROAD,
KOZHIKODE., PIN - 673001
SRI POULOCHAN ANTONY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).No.13577/2024 2
N. NAGARESH, J.
----------------------------
W.P.(C) No.13577 of 2024
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Limited to the
petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002.
2. The respondents paid ₹19,07,667/- to the petitioner
as Housing Loan and ₹2,89,426/- as Top Up Loan in the year
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.
3. Though the petitioner requested the respondents to
permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy
monthly instalments, the respondents 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
respondents are 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 respondents 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 2022. The petitioner
committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The respondents repeatedly reminded the petitioner
and required him to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately
omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the respondents 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 respondents.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if
the petitioner is 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 petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the outstanding amount due to the respondents
from the petitioner as on 03.04.2024 is ₹24,63,059/- and the
overdue amount is ₹2,90,949/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the
Standing Counsel representing the respondents.
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 respondents.
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
₹2,90,949/- in subsequent consecutive 10 equal
monthly instalments along with accruing interest and
other charges, if any. First of such installments shall be
paid on or before 30.04.2024.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The petitioner shall also pay current EMIs along
with the aforesaid payments.
(v) If the petitioner pays the amount as directed
above, any coercive proceedings against the petitioner
will stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
Sbna/
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13577/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
16.03.2024 ISSUED BY THE AUTHORISED
OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK
