Kerala High Court
Abdul Majeed.M vs The Authorized Officer 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. 5942 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ABDUL MAJEED M.,
AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O MUHAMMED ALI,
MALIYEKKAL HOUSE,
MUNDERI SANTHIL NAGAR,
KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673121
BY ADVS.
M.R.SASITH
R.K.CHIRUTHA
RESPONDENT:
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
IDBI BANK LTD, RETAIL RECOVERY,
REGIONAL OFFICE,
PANAMPILLY NAGAR ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682036
BY ADVS.
SMT.R.REMA
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.5942/2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court
aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of
financial advance made by the IDBI 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 ₹37 lakhs to the petitioner as
KCC facility in the year 2017. 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 advance 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.P1 and P2
notices.
4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to
clear the outstanding amounts towards the advance, if
sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly
instalments. If the respondent is 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 respondent, it is submitted that
the advance was given to the petitioner in the year 2017.
The petitioner committed default in repaying the advance.
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.P1 and P2 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 14.02.2024 is ₹ 52,23,317/-.
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 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 ₹52,23,317/- in 12
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 15.03.2024.
(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) 5942/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
31/1/2024 IS ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN CRL M.P NO 2819
/2023 DATED 12/5/2023 PASSED BY THE
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
KALPETTA WAYANAD
