Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mohammed Faizal P K vs Hdfc Bank Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 6351 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6351 Ker
Judgement Date : 6 March, 2024

Kerala High Court

Mohammed Faizal P K vs Hdfc Bank Ltd on 6 March, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                        PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2024/16TH PHALGUNA, 1945
                 WP(C) NO. 5082 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:

    1    MOHAMMED FAIZAL P K,
         AGED 53 YEARS,
         S/O P K KHALID,
         POOVATHUMPARAMBILHOUSE,
         NAMBIAPURAM ROAD,
         PALLURUTHY,
         COCHIN,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006
    2    P.K.F MARINE,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
         MOHAMMED FAIZAL P K,
         DOOR NO. 19/2131-B,
         NAMBIAPURAM ROAD,
         PALLURUTHY,
         COCHIN,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006
    3    SHEREENA A B,
         AGED 50 YEARS,
         W/O MOHAMMED FAIZAL P K,
         POOVATHUMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
         NAMBIAPURAM ROAD,
         PALLURUTHY,
         COCHIN,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006

         BY ADV P.T.SHEEJISH


RESPONDENTS:

    1    HDFC BANK LTD.,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
         PALARIVATTOMBRANCH,
         3RD FLOOR,SL PLAZA,
         PALARIVATTOM JUNCTION,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682025
 W.P.(C) No.5082/2024
                            :2:


    2     BRANCH MANAGER,
          HDFC BANK LTD,
          PALARIVATTOM BRANCH,
          3RD FLOOR, SL PLAZA,
          PALARIVATTOM JUNCTION,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682025
    3     AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
          HDFC BANK LTD, 3RD FLOOR,
          SL PLAZA, PALARIVATTOM JUNCTION,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682025

          BY ADV. SRI.PREMCHAND M.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.5082/2024
                                  :3:




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6th day of March, 2024

The petitioners, who have availed a financial

advance from the HDFC Bank, have approached this

Court seeking the following reliefs:

"i) To issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the respondents to keep the coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4, against the petitioners in abeyance and permit the petitioners to pay the overdue amount in 25 monthly instalments without hampering the family life of the petitioners, after regularising the loan account.

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or order or direction to the 1st respondent to provide a proper loan account statement.

iii) To dispense with the filing of the translation of the vernacular documents.

iv) Such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the nature of this case."

2. It is evident from the pleadings that the

petitioners are challenging proceedings pursuant to

Ext.P4. Ext.P4 is an order issued by the Advocate

Commissioner appointed by the Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam under Section 14 of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The

petitioners also seek to repay the amount in instalments.

3. Standing Counsel entered appearance and

resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it

is submitted that against the Property Loan of ₹20 lakhs

disbursed to the petitioners in the year 2017, the overdue

amount payable by the petitioners now is ₹21,23,976/-.

The total outstanding payable by the petitioners as on

12.02.2024 would be more than ₹32,26,639/-.

4. Standing Counsel further pointed out that the

petitioners had earlier approached this Court filing W.P.

(C) No.25124 of 2022 and this Court as per Ext.P3

judgment dated 10.01.2024 granted the petitioners

opportunity to make a proposal for One Time Settlement.

The petitioners did not make any such proposal. In the

circumstances, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioners and the Standing Counsel representing the

respondents.

6. It is evident from the pleadings that the

petitioners are in effect challenging proceedings pursuant

to Ext.P4 notice. Ext.P4 notice is one issued when the

Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court has passed an order as

per Section 14 of the the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002. If the petitioners are

aggrieved by Section 14 proceedings, the petitioners

have to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal invoking

Section 17.

7. As regards the prayer of the petitioners to

permit the petitioners to pay the remaining amount in

instalments, it is to be noted that the petitioners had

earlier approached this Court filing W.P.(C) No.25124 of

2022. At that point of time, the petitioners wanted to make

a One Time Settlement proposal. This Court granted

opportunity to the petitioners to settle the account by a

One Time Settlement. According to the petitioners, the

petitioners offered a One Time Settlement proposal, but

the Bank did not act on it. The Standing Counsel would,

however, controvert this allegation.

8. Be that as it may, the petitioners have not

availed the benefit of One Time Settlement so far.

Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioners can be

given an opportunity to propose a One Time Settlement

of the loan account on strict conditions.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of

directing that if the petitioners remit upfront payment of

₹10 lakhs towards One Time Settlement and make a

concrete proposal for One Time Settlement giving the

settlement amount and timeline for payment of the same,

within a period of one week from today, the respondents

shall consider the same. If the petitioners remit the

amount as directed above and make a One Time

Settlement proposal within one week from today, the

respondents shall defer coercive proceedings, if any,

against the petitioner till a decision is taken on the One

Time Settlement proposal.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE SR

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5082/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 27.06.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.07.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RDRESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO. 25124 OF 2022 DATED 10.01.2024 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 05.02.2024 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPLICANTS FOR ONE TIME SETTLEMENTPREFERRED BEFORE THE 1STRESPONDENT DATED 19.01.2024 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE APPLICANTSFOR ONE TIME SETTLE BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 15.02.2024 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL COVER IN WHICH THE APPLICANTSHAVE SENT EXHIBIT P5 APPLICATION TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 15.02.2024

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter