Kerala High Court
Koshy Samuel vs South Indian Bank Ltd on 4 July, 2025
2025:KER:49158
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 19751 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
KOSHY SAMUEL,
AGED 70 YEARS, THARAYILATH PUTHEN BUNGLWE,
VENMONY POST, CHENGANNOR, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN-689509
BY ADVS.SHRI.GENTLE C.D.
SMT.MARTEENA MILAN P.J.
RESPONDENTS:
1 SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MAIN BRANCH,
MAR BASALIOUS BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR,
SPENCER JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN-695039
2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, TC 31/151,
YMCA BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR,
M.G. ROAD STATUE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUNIL SHANKER
SMT.VIDYA GANGADHARAN
SHRI.THOMAS GLAISON
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:49158
-2-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 19751 of 2025
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-
1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction to stay the
operation of the Exhibit-P4 demand notice issued
by the 2nd respondent.
2. Issue an appropriate order or direction to the
respondents to consider the total outstanding
amount as the one already agreed in the Exhibit-P1
settlement award. Further interest, charges, and
most may be levelled on it for the delay in
payment.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ order or direction to facilitate a mediation
between the parties to arrive at an amicable one-
time settlement facility to the outstanding amount.
4. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ order or direction to command the
respondents to afford a reasonable time to the
2025:KER:49158
petitioner to payback the amount legally entitles to
them as OTS.
5. To issue such appropriate writ, order, or
direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and just in the circumstances of case and in the
interest of Justice.
2. It is seen that the Bank had filed O.A.No.627/2022
before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-2, Ernakulam, which was
allowed and Ext.P5 is the demand notice issued under the recovery
certificate issued in the above case for an amount of Rs.
3,36,12,267.33/- as on 02.05.2025. It is pointed out that through
Ext.P1 award of the Lok Adalat held on 05.10.2024, the Debts
Recovery Tribunal-2, Ernakulam, in Securitisation Application
No.319/2022 the matter was settled on the following terms:-
1. The applicants/borrowers have agreed to pay to the
secured creditor/defendant a sum of Rs. 2,90,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Crores Ninety Lakhs only) and the defendant
bank has agreed to accept the same in full and final
settlement of the secured debt due to the secured
crediotr/defendant bank subject to the following terms
and conditions:-
2. The applicants/borrowers shall pay an amount of
Rs.2,90,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores Ninety Lakhs only) to
2025:KER:49158
the aforesaid bank in 4 instalments as more fully set out
hereunder:-
Instalment Amount To be paid on or before
1 Instalment
st
Rs. 10,00,000/- 15/10/2024
2nd Instalment Rs. 35,00,000/- 26/10/2024
3rd Instalment Rs. 28,00,000/- 30/11/2024
4th Instalment Rs. 2,17,00,000/- 31/12/2024
3. On due payment of the aforesaid instalment amounts
by the applicants/borrowers within the period as
stipulated above, the defendant bank shall within fifteen
days from receipt of said amount return the title deeds of
the applicants/borrowers so deposited with them and the
mortgage charge over the schedule immovable properties
shall stand released.
4. The applicants/borrowers withdraw all the
contentions raised by them in the SA.
5. On payment of the compromise amount in full as
stipulated above, the secured creditor/defendant bank
shall deliver the possession of the secured assets to the
applicants/borrowers, if physical possession has been
taken by the secured creditor/defendant bank.
6. In the event of failure of the applicants/borrowers
to pay one or more of the instalments as stated above, the
applicants/borrowers shall forfeit the benefits of this
compromise and the applicants/borrowers agree and
consent that the secured creditor/defendant bank shall be
at liberty, without prejudice to its recourse against other
mortgaged properties, if any, to proceed further under the
SARFAESI Act, 2002 without any further notice and to
2025:KER:49158
recover the entire dues as claimed in the demand
notice/possession notice with interest, costs, charges and
expenses by sale of the secured assets/security interest
mentioned in the demand/possession notice.
7. Both parties hereby admit and acknowledge that they
have arrived at a settlement as above on their own accord,
free will and volition and therefore pray to dispose of the
above case upon passing an award in terms of this
compromise.
3. The petitioner had also filed W.P.(C) No.17026/2025
claiming the following reliefs:-
"1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction to stay the
operation of the Exhibit-P1 notice issued by the 2 nd
respondent.
2. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ order or direction commanding the 1 st
respondent to afford a reasonable time to the
petitioner to payback the legally entitled amount
due to them.
3. To issue such appropriate direction to arrive at a
settlement between the parties or any other writ,
order, or direction which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and just in the circumstances of case and in
the interest of Justice."
2025:KER:49158
4. Recording the submissions of the learned counsel for
the Bank that the sale proposed in Ext.P1 did not take place, the
said writ petition was closed as infructuous.
5. Having agreed to the terms of the settlement
incorporated in Ext.P1 and having made two payments in two
instalments under the same, the challenge against the award
cannot be entertained, much less in the absence of any ground
whatsoever to even consider a challenge to the award.
There is no merit at all in the writ petition, and the same
is dismissed.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
bpr
2025:KER:49158
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19751/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LOK ADALAT AWARD
DATED 05/10/2024 FOR THE TOTAL SETTLED
OUTSTANDING LOAN DUE AS ₹2.9 CRORE
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SENT BY THE
PETITIONER VIA E-MAIL ATTACHMENT DATED
21ST APRIL 2024
Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE
DATED 09.04.2024 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER
AND THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER
Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY WITH DEMAND
SENT BY THE RESPONDENT DATED
29/04/2025, REJECTING THE PROPOSAL
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FROM
THE DRT-II DATED 02/05/2025 FOR AN
AMOUNT OF ₹ 3,36,12,267.33/- IN
ADDITION TO OTHER COSTS CHARGES AND
EXPENSES
EXHIBIT-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE
DATED 09.04.2024 HAVING A HIGHER VALUE
OF ₹28 LACKS THEN THE PROPERTY SOLD IN
AUCTION BY THE RESPONDENTS
EXHIBIT-P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF CC
208/2025 FILING DATE 23-12-2024 FROM
THE OFFICIAL GOVT. E-COURTS SERVICE
DISTRICT COURT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
EXHIBIT-P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE
DATED 17/06/2025 ENTERED BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND THE PROSPECTIVE BUYER
ONE MR. JOSEPH THOMAS HAVING E-STAMP
SERIAL NO. 20252600000174885
