Kerala High Court
Murali Govindhan vs State 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. 8693 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 MURALI GOVINDHAN
AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDHAN,
RESIDING AT MURALIBHAVAN, PALAKKAL,
THAKIDI P.O, KUNNATHANAM VILLAGE,
MALLAPPALLI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.
THE PROPRIETOR OF M/S. KIDS ZONE BABY STORE
IN KARTHIKA BUILDING - 689581.
2 OMANA MURALI
AGED 58 YEARS, W/O. MURALI GOVINDHAN,
RESIDING AT MURALIBHAVAN, PALAKKAL,
THAKIDI P.O, KUNNATHANAM VILLAGE,
MALLAPPALLI TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA - 689581.
BY ADVS.
C.V.MANUVILSAN
NAEEM IBRAHIM
P.HARI HARAN NAIR
O.A.ANJU
VRINDA LAKSHMANAN
AJITHA KUMARI M.M.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE BANK OF INDIA
REGD. OFFICE AT CORPORATE CENTRE,
MADAME CAMA ROAD, NARIMAN POINT,
MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR & CEO., PIN - 400021.
2 STATE BANK OF INDIA LOCAL HEAD OFFICE
ROTARY JUNCTION, POOJAPPURA MAIN RD,
KESARI NAGAR, POOJAPURA,
W.P.(C)No.8693 of 2024
:2:
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT GENERAL
MANAGER, PIN - 695012.
3 THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA, KUNNAMTHANAM,
SY. NO. 187/4, PATHANAMTHITTA,
KERALA, PIN - 689581.
4 STATE BANK OF INDIA, RASMEC
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER,
CHIEF MANAGER, HEMALATHA V.R - 689101.
5 ADV. SUDHAKARAN V.R.
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER,
SNDP UNION BUILDING, CENTRAL JUNCTION,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689645.
BY ADV.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR
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.8693 of 2024
:3:
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 State 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 ₹10 lakhs to the petitioners as
Cash Credit Facility and ₹1,50,000/- as Term Loan in the
year 2015. The petitioners state that though the petitioners
made remittances promptly during the initial repayment
period of the financial advances, they could not pay the
repayment instalments promptly later due to Covid-19
pandemic. The repayment of loans fell into arrears. It
happened due to reasons beyond the control of the
petitioners.
3. Though the petitioners requested the Bank to
permit the petitioners 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.P5 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
instalments. 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 year 2015.
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.P5 notice
was issued in these circumstances. The loan account is
declared as NPA in the year 2021. 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 remit the balance
outstanding amount in instalments, a short breathing time
can be granted to the petitioners to clear the dues. The
Standing Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount in
Cash Credit Facility account due to the Bank from the
petitioners is ₹13,48,188/- and in the Term Loan account is
₹1,40,718/-.
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 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 an amount
of ₹3 lakhs on or before 30.04.2024.
(ii) The petitioners shall remit the balance
outstanding amount in both the loan
accounts in subsequent consecutive eight
equal monthly instalments thereafter, along
with accruing interest and other Bank
charges, if any.
(iii) If the petitioners commit default in
making payments as directed above, the
respondents will be at liberty to continue
with coercive proceedings against the
petitioners in accordance with law.
(iv) If the petitioners make payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if
any, against the petitioners shall stand
deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ams
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8693/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE HYPOTHECATION
AGREEMENT DATED 04.12.2015, EXECUTED
BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE STATE
BANK OF TRAVANCORE, AS CASH AND
CREDIT FACILITY AGAINST PROPERTY
Exhibit P2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL
AGREEMENT OF LOAN CUM HYPOTHECATION
DATED 19.11.2020
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS FROM THE
BANK ON 06.04.2022
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER RULE
8 (1) OF THE SARFAESI ACT, DATED
18.11.2023, ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTERED
NOTICE ISSUED BY ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER TO THE PETITIONERS DATED
08.02.2024
