Kerala High Court
Shanmugadasan vs The Nilambur Co-Operative Urban Bank ... on 20 June, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 22083 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
SHANMUGADASAN,
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O.UNNIKUNJAN, PANAMPATTA HOUSE,
KATHIKADANPOYIL, ERUMAMUNDA (P.O),
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679334
BY ADV K.DILIP
RESPONDENT:
THE NILAMBUR CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD,
REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER/
AUTHORIZED OFFICER, PIN - 679329
BY ADVS.
RAMESH BABU T
C.K.SREEJITH(K/2048/1999)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.22083 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Nilambur Co-operative Urban Bank Limited 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 ₹5 lakhs to the petitioner as
Business Loan in the year 2019. 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 financial
stringency. 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 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.P3 notice.
4. The petitioner states that he is 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
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
loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2019. The
petitioner committed default in repaying the loan.
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 Ext.P3 was 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 20.06.2024 is ₹8,71,950/-.
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 loan
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 ₹2 lakhs on or
before 29.06.2024 and the balance
outstanding amount in seven consecutive
and equal monthly instalments thereafter
along with accruing interest and other Bank
charges, if any.
(ii) If the petitioner commits single default
in making payments as directed above, the
respondent will be at liberty to continue with
the coercive proceedings against the
petitioner in accordance with law.
(iii) If the petitioner makes payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
spk
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22083/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE M.C.NO.287/2024
DATED 22/01/2024
Exhibit -P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE C.J.M,
MANJERI IN M.C.NO.287/2024 DATED
22/02/2024
Exhibit -P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY
THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED
03/06/2024
