Kerala High Court
Basheer P.P vs The Perinthalmanna Urban Co-Operative ... on 21 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 18008 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 BASHEER P.P
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O RAYINKUFTY, RESIDING AT PALLIPARAMBAN HOUSE
VATTALOOR P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676507.
2 JUMALIA
AGED 59 YEARS
W/O, BASHEER, RESIDING AT PALLIPARAMBAN HOUSE V
ATTALOOR P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676507.
BY ADV N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE PERINTHALMANNA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1758
REP. BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER PERINTHALMANNA P.O,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322.
2 BRANCH MANAGER
THE PERINTHALMANNA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1758
MAKKARAPARAMBA BRANCH, MAKKARAPARAMBA P.O, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676507.
BY ADVS.
JAYASREE K.P.
JOHN JOSEPH(K/000875/2019)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 18008 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024
The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made
by the Perinthalmanna Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd No.1758 to
the petitioners, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002.
2. The Bank paid ₹8 lakhs to the petitioners as
Mortgage Loan in the year 2019. The petitioners state that
though the petitioners made remittances promptly during the
initial repayment period of the financial advance, they could not
pay the repayment installments promptly later as the 1st
petitioner was affected with cancer and had to undergo surgery.
The repayment of loan fell into arrears. It happened due to
reasons beyond the control of the petitioners.
3. Though the petitioners requested the Bank to permit
the petitioners to repay the outstanding 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.P2 and P4 notices.
4. The petitioners state that they are still in a position to
clear the outstanding 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
petitioners, they 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 petitioners.
On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the loan was
given to the petitioners in the year 2019. The petitioners
committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioners and
required them to clear the dues. The petitioners deliberately
omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other
go than to proceed against the petitioners invoking the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The
impugned Exts.P2 and P4 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 petitioners are 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 petitioners to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel
submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from
the petitioners as on 21.5.2024 is ₹13,71,219/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners and the
Standing Counsel representing the Bank.
9. The specific case of the petitioners is that the
petitioners have 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
petitioners. The petitioners have 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 petitioners to clear off the liability.
11. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the
following directions:
(i) The petitioners shall remit the outstanding amount
of ₹13,71,219/- in 10 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 21.06.2024.
(ii) If the petitioners commit single default in making
payments as directed above, the respondents will be at
liberty to continue with the coercive proceedings
against the petitioners in accordance with law.
(iii) If the petitioners make payments as directed
above, coercive proceedings, if any, against the
petitioners shall stand deferred.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
Sru
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18008/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS IN
RESPECT OF THE ABOVE LOAN AS ON 31/1/2024
ISSUED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED
28/12/2020 ISSUED BY THE BANK TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6/4/2024 OF THE
HONOURABLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
MANJERI IN M.C. NO. 401/2024.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1/5/2024 OF THE
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER ISSUED TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED
28/11/2023 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER ISSUED FROM
THE MVR CANCER CENTRE AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE
KOZHIKODE.
