Kerala High Court
Babu M Nair vs The Authorized Officer (The Chief ... on 23 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 16378 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 BABU M NAIR
AGED 59 YEARS, MATHILIL HOUSE, MANISSERI P.O,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 521.
2 GEETHA BABU
AGED 53 YEARS, MATHILIL HOUSE, MANISSERI P.O,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 521.
BY ADV
N.P.PRAJEESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (THE CHIEF MANAGER)
STATE BANK OF INDIA, ARMB, 1ST FLOOR,
R.S BUILDING, M.G ROAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 682 011.
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA, OTTAPPALAM BRANCH,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 521.
BY ADV
C.AJITH KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 16378 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024
The petitioners, who have availed a Housing Loan of
Rs.23 lakhs from the State Bank of India, are before this
Court seeking the following reliefs:-
i) Call for records leading to Exhibit P1 and to
quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari
or other appropriate wit, order or direction;
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction
commanding the respondents to drop all
further proceedings under the SARFAESI Act
and permit the petitioner to pay the overdue
amount in 15 Equal Monthly Installments and
to regularize the loan account; a and d:"
2. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioners
have failed to maintain the loan account and the Bank has
initiated coercive proceedings. It is at this stage that the
petitioners are before this Court seeking to command the
respondents to drop all further coercive proceedings under
the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and permit
the petitioners to pay overdue amount in 15 equal monthly
instalments.
3. When this writ petition came up for admission, this
Court passed an interim order on 23.04.2024, staying further
coercive proceedings on condition that the petitioners remit
an amount of Rs.8,00,000/-, within a period of one month.
The petitioner has not remitted the said amount.
4. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf
of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The
Standing Counsel pointed out that the petitioner has
miserably failed to maintain the loan account. The total
amount payable by the petitioners as on 23.05.2024 would
be more than Rs.46,93,000/-. The petitioner could not pay
even Rs.8,00,000/- as directed by this Court.
5. Heard.
6. The basic challenge of the petitioner in this writ
petition is over Ext.P1. Ext.P1 is a Demand Notice issued
under Section 13 (2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction
of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002. The petitioner has an efficacious alternate remedy
against Ext.P1 under Section 17 of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002.
In the circumstances, in view of the availability of
alternate remedy, the writ petition is dismissed. The
petitioner will be at liberty to approach the Bank for any
arrangement / settlement of the loan account.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16378/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
11.11.2019 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13 (2)
OF THE SARFAESI ACT BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit-P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY
DATED 17.07.2023 ISSUED DR. SURESH
KUMAR, SENIOR CONSULTANT NEURO SURGEON
AND SPINE SURGEON, AMALA INSTITUTE OF
MEDICAL SCIENCE, THRISSUR.
