Kerala High Court
Riya Mary Moncy vs The Authorised Officer (Chief Manager) on 26 May, 2016
Author: A.M.Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2016/5TH JYAISHTA, 1938
WP(C).No. 18390 of 2016 (W)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
RIYA MARY MONCY,
CHANDRATHIL HOUSE, PAMPAKUDA P.O.,
MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER (CHIEF MANAGER),
BANK OF INDIA, MULAKULAM SOUTH P.O.,
KOTTAYAM-686 610.
BY SRI.J.HARIKUMAR, SC, BANK OF INDIA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
msv/
WP(C).No. 18390 of 2016 (W)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.1.3.2016 IN CMP.856/2016 OF THE CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM.
P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.12.4.2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
-------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msv/
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.18390 of 2016
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of May, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court being faced with proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. This writ petition is filed after availing an earlier opportunity by filing W.P.(C).No.26919 of 2015. By judgment dated 08.09.2015, the petitioner was granted three equal monthly instalments to discharge the total liability of 5,96,951/- with accrued interest. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some amount had been paid. Now that the vehicle had been seized and taken possession by the respondent Bank and an opportunity should be granted to repay the balance due amount in instalments.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that after disposal of W.P.(C).No.26919 of 2015, the petitioner did not care to pay any amount. The Bank had thereafter, taken possession of the vehicle on 03.03.2016 and it is posted for sale tomorrow.
3. Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, I do not think that any further instalment can be granted to the petitioner. Taking into consideration the fact that the vehicle is proclaimed for sale, I do not think it necessary to defer the sale. However, to enable the petitioner to avail one more opportunity to pay the entire amount, this writ petition is disposed of as under : W.P.(C) No.18390 of 2016 2
1. The respondent Bank is entitled to proceed with the sale of the vehicle. But the confirmation of sale shall be deferred by one week from today. The purchaser, if any, shall be informed about the order passed by this Court deferring the confirmation of sale.
2. The petitioner is granted a week's time to repay the entire amount due to the Bank. If the payment is made as stated above, the sale shall stand set aside and if not, the Bank is entitled to proceed in accordance with law.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
AV