Kerala High Court
Sujiya vs The South Indian Bank Ltd on 22 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 44210 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
SUJIYA
AGED 51 YEARS, W/O SASINDRAN,
VALIYAVALAPPIL HOUSE, CHERUVATHANI PO,
THRISSUR., PIN - 680 523.
BY ADV
ALISHA ASLAM
RESPONDENT:
THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,
REP. BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
REGIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR, 1ST FLOOR,
PLATINUM JULBILEE BUILDING, CIVIL LINE ROAD,
NEAR CHILDREN'S PARK, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR.,
PIN - 680 003.
BY ADV
SUNIL SANKAR, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 22.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 44210 of 2023
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved
by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance
made by the South Indian 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 ₹10 lakhs to the petitioner as
Mortgage 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 instalments promptly later. The repayment
of loan fell into arrears later due to financial stringency. 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.P1
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 instalments. 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.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and
required her 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.P1 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 22.05.2024 is ₹11,84,142/- and the
overdue amount is ₹2,70,363/-.
8. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner
and the learned 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
account 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.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of
directing that if the petitioner remits the overdue amount of
₹2,70,363/- along with accruing interest and other Bank
charges, if any, within a period of one month from today, any
coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand
deferred. After making the payment of overdue amount as
directed above, the petitioner may approach the Bank for
regualrisation of loan account. If the petitioner is not making
the payment as directed above, the respondents will be at
liberty to continue with coercive proceedings against the
petitioner in accordance with law.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 44210/2023
PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT
Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF POSSESSION
DATED 31/10/2023 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT BANK.
