Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 7]

Kerala High Court

Nirmala Xavier vs Canara Bank on 20 April, 2016

Author: K. Vinod Chandran

Bench: K.Vinod Chandran

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT:-

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

         WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/8TH ASHADHA, 1938

                  W.P.(C).No.16134 of 2016 (N)
                    -------------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
-------------

            NIRMALA XAVIER, AGED 60 YEAS, W/O. JOHN JACOB,
            'NANDANAM', CHAMBAKULATH HOUSE,
            NEAR VIPLAVA KALAVEDI, EDAKKAD,
            KOZHIKODE.

            BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI.


RESPONDENT(S):-
----------------

          1. CANARA BANK,
            WEST HILL BRANCH, CHAKKORATHUKULAM,
            KANNUR ROAD, CALICUT-673 011,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

          2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
            R & L SECTION, CIRCLE OFFICE,
            CHALAPPURAM, CALICUT-673 002.


            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON
            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
            R1&2  BY ADV. SRI.KURYAN THOMAS.


       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
  29-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P(C).No.16134 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------

                              APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:-
------------------------

EXT.P1     A COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS TILL 22.4.2016 ISSUED BY
           THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK.

EXT.P2     A COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
           NO.CCO/R&L/DGM/SARF REP WST HL/126/2015 DTD.19.6.2015.

EXT.P3     A COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.21.3.2016 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER
           TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE RESPONDENTS.

EXT.P4     A COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
           NO.CCO/R&L/DGM/SARF REP WST HL/279/2016 DTD.28.3.2016.

EXT.P5     A COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DTD.19.1.2016 ISSUED BY THE
           1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P6     TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.04.2016 OF THE
           ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS/ANNEXURES:-
-----------------------------------

ANNEXURE R1(a)   TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.10017 OF 2013
                 DATED 09.04.2013 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.



Vku/-                        [ true copy ]



                      K. Vinod Chandran, J
                   -----------------------------------
                   W.P(C).No.16134 of 2016-N
                   ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 29th day of June, 2016

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved with the auction notice issued by the Bank at Exhibit P5. The petitioner before this Court contends that if ten instalments are granted with respect to the default committed in respect of the two out of the three housing loans availed of by her, she will settle the entire dues; so as to save her property. An order of status quo was passed. The respondent-Bank has filed a statement. One out of the three loans is also closed.

2. A reading of the statement of the respondent would indicate that the petitioner was before the Debts Recovery Tribunal in the year 2011, seeking time for settling the matter. The Tribunal directed the petitioner to make an initial deposit of Rs.3.5 lakhs on or before 07.10.2011, which direction was not complied with. The petitioner only made a payment of Rs.75,000/-. The petitioner did not then approach the Tribunal and, later, in 2013 when again recovery WP(C) No.16134 of 2016 - 2 - proceedings were revived, the petitioner approached this Court. It can be presumed, from a reading of Annexure R1(a), that the contention of the petitioner was that she would retire soon and shall make payments to the Bank from the terminal benefits that she would get. However this Court specifically found that there was no justification to keep the recovery action till that time. The petitioner was granted ten equal monthly instalments, starting from 30.04.2013, to settle the entire loan. Even those instalments were not complied with and now when the recovery proceedings were revived, again the petitioner has approached this Court with the above writ petition. The petitioner as of now is also retired.

3. The learned Counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that the Bank had not proceeded with Exhibit P5 notice only since there was an order of status quo from this Court. The Bank shall issue a fresh notice, in accordance with the Act indicating the date of auction as three months from now, i.e., in the first week of October, 2016, and the petitioner would be entitled to settle the entire dues to the Bank within that period. WP(C) No.16134 of 2016 - 3 - The Bank shall issue a statement of accounts to the petitioner showing the amounts deposited towards principal and interest, within a period of two weeks from today.

With the above observation, the writ petition would stand disposed of. No costs.

Sd/-

K.Vinod Chandran Judge.

vku/-

[ true copy ]