Kerala High Court
Viswam vs Union Bank Of India on 23 July, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 36939 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
VISWAM, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN PILLAI,
IMP THEATRE, PARASSALA P.O.,
PADANTHALUMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
SMT.M.BINDUDAS
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
UNION BANK OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
CHALAI BAZAR BRANCH, JAMAL BUILDING,
MARKET MAIN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 036.
BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
bp
WP(C).No. 36939 of 2016 (N)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
P1: TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL TERM LOAN AGREEMENT (SD 18)
DATED 23.7.2009 WHICH STIPULATE FIXED RATE OF
INTEREST OF 12.50% PER ANNUM WITH MONTHLY REST.
P2: TRUE COPY OF THE TERM LOAN AGREEMENT (SD 19) DATED
23.7.2009 WHICH STIPULATE FIXED RATE OF INTEREST OF
12.50% PER ANUM WITH MONTHLY REST.
P3: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 15.4.2016 DEMANDING
OVERDUE AMOUNT OF RS.1,85,091/- DUE FROM 24.1.2016.
P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 10.5.2016 DEMANDING
OVERDUE AMOUNT OF RS.1,80,550/- DUE FROM 24.2.2016.
P5: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 10.6.2016 DEMANDING
OVERDUE AMOUNT OF RS.12 LAKHS TO BE REMITTED BEFORE
30.6.2016.
P6: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER DATED
24.6.2016 BEFORE THE BANK.
P7: TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 11.7.2016 BY THE REGIONAL
OFFICE OF RESPONDENT.
P8: TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FROM 23.7.2009 TO
08.7.2016 WHICH IS ISSUED BY RESPONDENT.
P9: TRUE COPY OF FORMAT OF LETTER SENT TO CHANGE FROM
BPLR TO BASE RATE.
P10: TRUE COPY OF FLOATING RATE OF INTEREST MADE
APPLICABLE TO THE LOAN OF PETITIONER FROM 18.9.2010
ONWARDS.
P11: TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 28.7.2016 BEFORE
BANKING OMBUDSMAN.
P12: TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 13.10.2016 FROM
BANKING OMBUDSMAN WITH DOCUMENTS APPENDED THEREON.
P13: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 15.10.2016 BY 1ST
RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER.
P14: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 04.11.2016 BY 1ST
RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
bp
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.C.No.36939 of 2016
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court when SARFAESI proceedings have been initiated by the respondent bank inter alia contending that direction has to be issued to the respondent bank to reckon the rate of interest at the rate of 12.5%. The bank had recalculated the loan account of the petitioner and thereafter, permitted the petitioner pay the amount and close the account.
2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner had entered into an agreement with the bank, by which the rate of interest was fixed at 12.5%. However, it is noted that the rate of interest had considerably changed unilaterally by the bank and presently they had charging at the rate of 16.5%. The rate of interest charged from 23.07.2009 to 17.09.2010 was 12.5%. The petitioner is now called upon to pay a higher amount than what is actually payable.
3. Since, the dispute raised by the petitioner with reference to a contract between the parties, I do not think that W.P.C.No36939/16 2 this Court will be justified in considering the disputed questions of fact especially which comes in the realm of contract. At the stage when measures are taken by the respondent bank under Section 13 (4), it is obviously open for the petitioner to challenge the claim by approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act or such other steps in accordance with law.
With the above observations, this writ petition is closed.
A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE DG