IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10445 of 2009(A)
1. SAFIA BEEVI,AGED 55 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. KABEER,AGED 57 YEARS,
Vs
1. THE QUILON CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.
... Respondent
2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
3. THE SALE OFFICER,
4. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.V.RAJA
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :31/03/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J
...........................................
WP(C).NO. 10445 OF 2009
............................................
DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF MARCH, 2009
JUDGMENT
Notice to respondents 1 and 2 is dispensed with preserving
their right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved.
Government Pleader takes notice for third and fourth
respondents.
2. The second petitioner who underwent certain physical
problems as evidenced by Ext.P3 and her husband, the first
petitioner, who also suffered certain situation evidenced by
Exts.P1 and P2, is stated to have availed a loan of Rs.3,00,000/-
in connection with the marriage of their daughter. The parties are
muslims. In the normal course, even the Muslim Law does not
concede to any custom of any amount being paid to the groom
whereas law relating to muslim community contemplate a
provision being made by the groom in favour of the bride. If that
were so and on the face of Dowry Prohibition act and other
attendant statutory provisions, it is unfortunate that an amount
of Rs.3,00,000/- has been spent on a marriage, particularly when
WP(C) 10445/2009 2
the facts in hand disclose that petitioners do not have the ability
to repay the entire loan.
3. With the passage of time, accruals have compelled the
bank to initiate action. They have obtained order under Section
14 of SARFAESI Act from the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The
petitioners show on the strength of Ext.P7 that an amount of
Rs.70,000/- was paid on 30.3.2009, that is yesterday. Taking
that into consideration, it is ordered that if the entire remaining
outstandings is paid off in five equal monthly instalments,
payable on or before 25th of every month, commencing from April
2009, the impugned distress action will be deferred and
thereafter dropped ultimately on satisfaction of the total accruals.
If there is default in repayment of any of the instalments as
aforesaid, the respondents will be at liberty to further proceed
with the impugned action forthwith. Learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate will also defer the proceedings in the light of what is
stated above. It is further clarified that this judgment will not
WP(C) 10445/2009 3
stand in the way of the creditor bank extending any ameliorative
measure by reducing the possible outstandings, if sought for, by
the petitioners.
THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
lgk/1/4