Kerala High Court
J. Ajayan vs The Authorised Officer on 21 October, 2014
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/29TH ASWINA, 1936
WP(C).No. 27513 of 2014 (L)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
------------------
J. AJAYAN
JYOTHI VILASOM, SAMBHUTHANGI, KUTTICHAL
KOTTOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH
RESPONDENT :
---------------------
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE,
UNION BANK BHAVAN, M.G.ROAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
bp
WP(C).No. 27513 of 2014 (L)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF M.C.745/2014 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK.
EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE
COMMISSIONER
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
bp
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
========================
W.P.(C). No. 27513 of 2014
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner availed a mortgage loan of 7 lakhs from the respondent Bank in the year 2011 creating security interest over the property in question. But the repayment could not be effected promptly, when the respondent Bank proceeded against the petitioner by resorting to the remedy under the SARFAESI Act which in turn is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the default was never wilful, but due to some unforeseen circumstances and that the petitioner does not dispute the liability to clear the due amount or the rights and liberties of the respondent in proceeding against the petitioner. The limited relief now pressed before this Court is to permit the petitioner to clear the entire liability, granting some breathing time in this regard by way of reasonable instalments.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits on instructions that, the total outstanding dues to close W.P.C. No. 27513 of 2014 -2- the loan account as on date is nearly 9 lakhs; out of which, the overdue amount in respect of the defaulted instalments will come around 6 lakhs.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been served with a notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner appointed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, at the instance of the Bank, and the physical possession will be taken over on 27.10.2014. It is stated that, the petitioner is ready to satisfy 50,000/- on or before the above date and the balance might be permitted to be cleared by way of reasonable instalments.
5. After hearing both the sides, particularly, in view of the limited extent relief sought for, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to deposit a sum of 50,000/- on or before 27.10.2014 and the balance by way of 'eight' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th day of November, 2014; followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of succeeding months. Subject to this, the coercive proceedings being pursued against the W.P.C. No. 27513 of 2014 -3- petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that, if any default is committed with regard to repayment of the liability as above, it will be open for the respondent Bank to proceed against the petitioner for realization of the entire amount in a lump, from the stage where it stands now. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
Writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
kp/-