Kerala High Court
Surendran R vs Canara Bank Represented By The Branch ... on 27 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 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 11569 OF 2024
PETITIONER
SURENDRAN R
AGED 56 YEARS
SURENDRAN R, AGED 56 YEARS, ASWATHY, MAHADEVIKAD,
KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690516
BY ADV S.GANESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 CANARA BANK REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER
CHINGOLI BRANCH, KARTHIKAPALLY,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690507
2 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
CANARA BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, GROUND FLOOR,
BSNL BUILDING, NEAR IRON BRIDGE,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688011
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR (STANDING COUNSEL)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the Canara 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 ₹5 lakhs to the petitioner and his
wife as Housing Loan in the year 2018. 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 installments promptly later. The
repayment of loan fell into arrears. It happened due to
reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit
the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly
installments, 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.P4 and P5 notices.
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 installments. If the
respondents are 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 respondents, it is submitted that
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
the loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2018. 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 Exts.P4 and P5 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 overdue amount
immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted
to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the overdue amount due to the Bank from the
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
petitioner ₹1,04,000/-.
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 the overdue
amount of ₹1,04,000/- in five consecutive
and equal monthly installments along with
accruing interest and other Bank charges, if
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
any. First of such installments shall be paid
on or before 15.04.2024.
(ii) If the petitioner commits 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) The petitioner shall also pay current
EMIs along with the aforesaid payments.
(iv) If the petitioner makes payments as
directed above, coercive proceedings, if any,
against the petitioner shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) NO.11569 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11569/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP (C) NO
38031 OF 2022 DATED 25.11.2022
Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT
PERTAINING TO SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT NO
6498101000190 OF THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
31.5.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
TO THE BRANCH MANAGER.
Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED OF
RESPONDENT BANK DATED 25/01/2024.
Exhibit-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.3.2024
RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER.
