Kerala High Court
Binesh Chandran vs M/S. Cholamandalam Investment And ... on 15 February, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024/26TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 5986 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 BINESH CHANDRAN,
AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O. RAMACHANDRAN,
VINAYAKA, EDAKKAD,
KUNNATHOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691553
2 SALINI SNEHALATHA,
AGED 30 YEARS,
W/O. BINESH CHANDRAN R.,
VINAYAKA, EDAKKAD,
KUNNATHOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691553
BY ADV C.P.PEETHAMBARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE
COMPANY LTD.
DARE, HOUSE NO. 2, NSC BOSE ROAD,
PARRYS,
CHENNAI REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER,
PIN - 600001
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER,
M/S. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE
COMPANY LTD., THIRUVALLA BRANCH,
THIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689102
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.5986/2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2024
The petitioners have approached this Court
aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of
financial advance made by the Cholamandalam Investment
and Finance Company Ltd. to the petitioners, invoking the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002.
2. The respondents paid ₹24 lakhs to the
petitioners as Housing Loan in the year 2021. 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
instalments promptly later. The repayment of loan fell into
arrears later. It happened due to reasons beyond the
control of the petitioners.
3. Though the petitioners requested the
respondents to permit the petitioners to repay the overdue
amounts in easy monthly instalments, the respondents
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.P4 and
P5 notices.
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 respondents and denied all the statements made by
the petitioners. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted
that the loan was given to the petitioners in the year 2021.
The petitioners committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The respondents repeatedly reminded the
petitioners and required them to clear the dues. The
petitioners deliberately omitted to do so. In the
circumstances, the respondents 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 Exts.P4 and P5 notices were issued in these
circumstances. The petitioners has not advanced any legal
reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the
respondents.
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
respondents from the petitioners as on 15.02.2024 is
₹33,15,116/- and the overdue amount as on 15.02.2024 is
₹5,40,225/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and
the Standing Counsel representing the respondents.
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 account occurred lately due to reasons
beyond the control of the petitioners. The petitioners have
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 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 ₹2 lakhs on or before 29.02.2024.
(ii) The petitioners shall remit the
balance overdue amount in subsequent
consecutive three equal monthly
instalments thereafter, along with accruing
interest and other administrative charges, if
any.
(iii) If the petitioners commits 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) The petitioners shall also pay current
EMIs along with the aforesaid payments.
(v) If the petitioners pays the amount as
directed above, any coercive proceedings
against the petitioners will stand deferred.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
SR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5986/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD
DATED 24/11/2023 ARB NO/C-HL/51/2023
OF THE SOLE ARBITRATOR
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
19/5/2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
5/7/2023 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT
ALONG WITH ITS POSTAL RECEIPT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
22.1.2024 IN M.C. NO. 92/2024 OF
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
KOLLAM
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
1/2/2024 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE PORUVAZHI GRAMA
PANCHAYATH, KOLLAM DATED 31/12/2022
