Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ahamed Koya vs Union Bank Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 9492 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 9492 Ker
Judgement Date : 4 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Ahamed Koya vs Union Bank Of India on 4 April, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
         THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                         WP(C) NO. 12457 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

     1        AHAMED KOYA
              AGED 79 YEARS
              S/O. PAREEDKUNJU, MUNEERA MANZIL,
              VIKAS NAGAR-182, PATTATHANAM P.O,
              KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
     2        SULPHIKAR AHAMED
              AGED 51 YEARS
              S/O AHAMED KOYA, RAHATH, PANTHRANDUMURI NAGAR 33A,
              THATTAMALA P.O, ERAVIPURAM,
              MAYYANAD, KOLLAM, PIN - 691020

              BY ADVS.
              ABDUL SALIM M.
              S.SUJIN
              NITA.N.S.


RESPONDENTS:

     1        UNION BANK OF INDIA
              KOLLAM MAIN BRANCH KHISE BUILDING, BEACH ROAD,
              KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.,
              PIN - 691001
     2        AUTHORIZED OFFICER (RECOVERY)
              UNION BANK OF INDIA,
              KOLLAM MAIN BRANCH KHISE BUILDING,
              BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001

              SRI.A.S.P.KURUP (STANDING COUNSEL)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.12457 Of 2024
                               2


                         JUDGMENT

Dated this the 4th day of April, 2024

The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by

the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance

made by the Union Bank of India 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 ₹90 lakhs towards Cash Credit

facility in the year 2002, ₹6.75 lakhs towards Housing Loan in

the year 2012 and ₹7.5 lakhs towards Vehicle Loan in the

year 2014 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

crisis. The repayment of loan fell into arrears. It happened

due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioners. WP(C) No.12457 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.P7 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 2002, 2012 WP(C) No.12457 Of 2024

and 2014.. The petitioners committed default in repaying the

loans.

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.P7 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 outstanding 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 from the WP(C) No.12457 Of 2024

petitioners as on 04.04.2024 is ₹1,03,44,640/-.

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

outstanding amount of ₹1,03,44,640/- in 12

consecutive and equal monthly installments

along with accruing interest and other Bank WP(C) No.12457 Of 2024

charges, if any. First of such instalments

shall be paid on or before 04.05.2024.

(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) If the petitioners make payments as

directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,

against the petitioners shall stand deferred.

(iv) If the petitioners make an application for

statement of accounts, the respondents shall

provide the same.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh WP(C) No.12457 Of 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12457/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.CCH.

504/50110 DATED 29/09/2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT SANCTIONING THE LOAN OF RS.90, 00,000 AS WORKING CAPITAL.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.SARFAESIA:

4667 DATED 04/12/2019 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF SARFAESIA ACT 2002 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3        TRUE   COPY    OF   THE    NOTICE   DATED
                  22/11/2021     ISSUED    BY    THE    1ST
                  RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4        TRUE   COPY    OF   THE    LETTER   DATED
                  08/04/2022    SUBMITTED    BY   THE   1ST

PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.

Exhibit P5        TRUE   COPY    OF   THE    LETTER   DATED
                  19/10/2022    SUBMITTED    BY   THE   1ST

PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK AND DETAILS OBTAINED FROM THE BANK SHOWING THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE RESPONDENT BANK.

Exhibit P6        TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE
                  DATED    31/12/2023    ISSUED    BY   THE

REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS & DEATHS, KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 04/03/2024 ALONG WITH THE ENCLOSURE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter