Suja Siju vs M/S.State Bank Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 14100 Ker

Kerala High Court

Suja Siju vs M/S.State Bank Of India on 28 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 28TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 7TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                         WP(C) NO. 15862 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:

     1        SUJA SIJU,
              AGED 38 YEARS
              W/O. SIJU MADHAVAN, ACHIKOOTIL HOUSE,
              MULLAPUZHA CHAL, CHANNALLOOR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686607
     2        SIJU MADHAVAN
              AGED 44 YEARS
              S/O. MADHAVAN, ACHIKOOTIL HOUSE,
              MULLAPUZHA CHAL, CHANNALLOOR,
              MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
              PIN - 686607
     3        MANU MADHAVAN
              AGED 42 YEARS
              S/O. MADHAVAN, ACHIKOOTIL HOUSE,
              MULLAPUZHA CHAL, CHANNALLOOR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
              PIN - 686607

              BY ADVS.
              G.HARIHARAN
              PRAVEEN.H.
              K.S.SMITHA
              V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
              GENTLE C.D.
              BIJOY SAM GEORGE
RESPONDENT:

              M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA,
              VAZHAKULAM BRANCH (7844), VAZHAKULAM, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686607,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER.,
              PIN - 686607

              BY ADV M.JITHESH MENON

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.15862 Of 2023           2




                        JUDGMENT

Dated this the 28th day of May, 2024

The petitioners, who have taken Agricultural Loans

from the State Bank of India, Vazhakkulam Branch, have

approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondent to permit the petitioners to clear off the loan arrears mentioned in Ext.P2 possession notice by paying the balance amount due to the bank after deducting the payment of Rs.7.12 lakhs effected by the petitioners 1 and 2 as evidenced by Ext.P3 pay in slip.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondent to return back the original title deed of the secured asset mentioned in Ext.P2 possession notice once the petitioners pay off the amount due towards the loan mentioned in Ext.P2 notice."

2. It is evident from the pleadings and arguments

that the petitioners have taken different Agricultural Loans.

The petitioners had a gold deposit also. The gold was sold

and adjusted against one loan.

3. Standing Counsel for the Bank submits that the

closure amount now in respect of all the five Agricultural

Loans would come to more than ₹1.42 Crores.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing

the respondent.

5. The 1st prayer of the petitioners is to command the

respondent to permit the petitioners to clear off the loan

arrears mentioned in Ext.P2 Possession Notice by paying

the balance amount due to the Bank after deducting the

payment of ₹7.12 lakhs effected by petitioners 1 and 2 as

evidenced by Ext.P3 pay-in-slip.

6. Standing Counsel would submit that the said

amount of ₹7.12 lakhs has already been adjusted against

one loan. Therefore, the said prayer of the petitioners cannot

be acceded to.

7. The subsequent prayer of the petitioners is to

command the respondent to return back the original Title

Deed of the secured asset mentioned in Ext.P2 Possession

Notice once the petitioners pay off the amount due towards

the loan mentioned in Ext.P2 notice.

8. It is stated by the respondent that yet the

petitioners are liable to pay an amount of ₹1.42 Crores along

with accruing interest. Therefore, unless the said loans are

cleared, the petitioners cannot legally claim Title Deeds in

respect of their property.

For all the afore reasons, I find no merit in the writ

petition. The writ petition is therefore dismissed.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15862/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTIES OWNED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER EXTENDING TO 2.71 ARES IN ENANELLUR VILLAGE IN MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED UNDER RULE 8(1) OF THE SARFAESI RULES ON 23.03.2023 BY THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PAY IN SLIP DATED 16.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF RS.7,12,000/-

                  TOWARDS    THE   LOAN    MENTIONED   IN
                  EXHIBIT.P2