Kerala High Court
Keerthi Krishna vs Authorised Officer 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. 17615 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
KEERTHI KRISHNA
AGED 31 YEARS
W/O VINESH KUMAR, SREEGANAPATHY,
KARIMULACKAL, KOMALLOOR P.O,
CHUNAKKARA, ALAPPUZHA,
PIN - 690505
BY ADV N.K.MOHANLAL
RESPONDENT:
AUTHORISED OFFICER
INDUSIND BANK LTD., M.G ROAD,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682016
BY ADV VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE
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.17615 Of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by
the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the IndusInd 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 ₹26,50,000/- to the petitioner as
Vehicle Loan in the year 2019. The petitioner states that
though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the
initial repayment period of the financial advance, she 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.
3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit
the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly
WP(C) No.17615 Of 2024
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 Ext.P2 notice.
4. The petitioner states that she 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
respondent is permitted to continue with the coercive
proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the
petitioner, she 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.
WP(C) No.17615 Of 2024
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and
required her to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately
omitted to do so. The petitioner's loan account was declared
as NPA in the year 2021. 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.P2 notice 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 overdue 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 17.05.2024 is ₹26,02,891/- and the
WP(C) No.17615 Of 2024
overdue amount as on 17.05.2024 is ₹8,70,363/-.
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 ₹3.5 lakhs
within one month and the balance overdue
amount in ten consecutive and equal monthly
installments immediately thereafter along
WP(C) No.17615 Of 2024
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) 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.17615 Of 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17615/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
28/10/2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
3/6/2023 IN CMP1146/2023 IN MC
228/2023 OF THE CJMALAPPUZHA
