Kerala High Court
Hassan K.M vs Peoples Urban Co Operative Bank Ltd 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. 5701 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
HASSAN K.M
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O MARACKAR KADAPILLY
MOOLAYIL HOUSE CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR
KALAMASSERY PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 683 104.
BY ADV
PADMALAYAN.P.P.
RESPONDENT:
PEOPLES URBAN CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD
51, THRIPPUNITHURA REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED OFFICER UNDER THE SARFAESI ACT 2002,
PIN - 682 301.
BY ADVS.
DEVAPRASANTH P.J
SMINI JOSE(K/262/2015)
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.5701 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2024
The petitioner, who had availed an Overdraft
Facility and a Term Loan from the respondent-Bank, has
approached this Court seeking to direct the respondent-Bank
to stay further proceedings on Ext.P1 Possession Notice and
to allow the petitioner to clear off the overdue amount in eight
monthly instalments.
2. The petitioner states that he could not maintain
the loan account due to 2018 floods and subsequent
Covid-19 pandemic. The petitioner continued to make certain
payments. The respondent has however issued Possession
Notice. Unless this Court interferes in the matter and grants
time to the petitioner to repay the amount in eight monthly
instalments, the petitioner's residential property will be taken
over by the respondent.
3. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf
of the respondent and resisted the writ petition. The Standing
Counsel pointed out that an Overdraft Facility of
Rs.1,40,00,000/- was given to the petitioner in the year 2023
and a Term Loan Rs.25 lakhs was earlier granted in the year
2017. Due to the consistent default of the petitioner, the total
outstanding liability as on date is Rs.1,67,23,580/-.
4. Standing Counsel further pointed out that when
the officials of the Bank approached the residence of the
petitioner for serving Sale Notice, the Bank Officials were
manhandled by the petitioner and a criminal case is
registered. The period of Term Loan is still not over. The
petitioner could have atleast paid the interest part and get
the loan account regualrised. The petitioner has not opted to
do so. In the circumstances, no reliefs can be granted to the
petitioner.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing
the Bank.
6. The total outstanding amount payable by the
petitioner is Rs.1,67,23,580/-. The petitioner's request for
instalment facility is stiffly resisted by the respondent-Bank.
The respondent has initiated proceedings invoking the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002, as can be seen from Ext.P1. In the circumstances, it
would not be proper to entertain this writ petition.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed. The
petitioner may, however, approach the Debts Recovery
Tribunal or the Bank Authorities for any
arrangements/settlement of the loan account.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5701/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE
DATED 26.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT BANK.
