Kerala High Court
Sasikumar vs The Kerala State Co-Operative Bank 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. 13396 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
SASIKUMAR,
AGED 71 YEARS,
S/O.GOPALAN NADAR,
LEKSHMI VILASAM BANGLOW,
AYITHIYOOR, BALARAMAPURAM P.O,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695501
BY ADV T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,
(KERALA BANK) REGIONAL OFFICE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PB. NO.5122,
KIZHAKKEKOTTA, FORT P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
PIN - 695001
2 THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR,
NEYYATTINKARA TALUK OFFICE,
NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695121
BY ADVS.
SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM
SRI.SREEJITH V.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13396/2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court
aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of
financial advance made by the Kerala State Co-operative
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 ₹10 lakhs to the petitioner as
Over Draft facility in the year 2018. 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 due
to Covid-19 pandemic. 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 Bank to
permit the petitioner to repay the outstanding 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 Exts.P3 and P4
notices.
4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to
clear the outstanding 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 Bank and denied all the statements made by the
petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that
the advance was given to the petitioner in the year 2018.
The petitioner committed default in maintaining the advance
facility.
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 Exts.P3 and P4 notices were 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 balance outstanding 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 31.03.2024 is ₹17,00,549/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and
the 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 of the
account 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 ₹17,00,549/- in 15
consecutive and equal monthly
installments along with accruing interest
and other Bank charges, if any. First of
such installments shall be paid on or
before 04.05.2024.
(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 pays the amount as
directed above, any coercive proceedings
against the petitioner will stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
SR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13396/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1465
DATED 16.7.1991 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
PASS BOOK ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES DATED
19.12.2023 UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE
REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICES DATED
13.2.2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
