IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32492 of 2008(R)
1. N.P.THOMAS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.TOM JOSE (PADINJAREKARA)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :05/11/2008
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
================================
W.P.(C).No.32492 of 2008 - R
===============================
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner availed a cash credit facility, overdrew and
the transaction became sticky. After the last financial year, there
was no transaction in the account. The bank also has complained
that the entire transaction of the petitioner, a businessman, is
not routed through the bank. The terms were thus faulted. The
loan was recalled and an amount of over Rs.1,10,00,000/- is
fixed for recovery with accruals.
2. On the issue of jurisdiction the applicability of the
SARFAESI Act is challenged on the ground that the security
provided is agricultural land and it is exempted from the
provisions of that Act. The only materials in support of this is
Ext.P1, a certificate of the agricultural officer which says that the
land is fertile, has coconut palms and is fit for agricultural
operations. That certificate is by itself not conclusive to hold that
issue in favour of the petitioner. Hence, without concluding him
on that, the said issue, which is a mixed one of law and facts, is
W.P.(C).No.32492 of 2008 – R 2
left open. In God’s Own Country, there may not be much space
which is not fit for cultivation barring the rocky patches which
may be unfit.
3. There is no other legal impediment or infirmity pointed
out or seen in the impugned proceedings. The plea of the
petitioner that Ext.P6 was issued seeking an opportunity to
regularise and that the same has not been replied would also not
stand, since bank has apparently disagreed to do so. It is also
stated by the learned counsel for the bank that it had replied to
Ext.P6.
4. Under such circumstances, preserving the liberty of
the petitioner to seek relief in accordance with law, this writ
petition is ordered directing that the distress action will stand
stayed, if the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.25,00,000/-
within a period of one week and a further amount of
Rs.25,00,000/- within a period of one month thereafter and
continues to remit the remaining amounts at the rate of
Rs.10,00,000/- per month payable on or before 10th of every
month commencing from December, 2008. In default of any of
W.P.(C).No.32492 of 2008 – R 3
the instalments as directed above, the benefit of this judgment
will stand recalled automatically. This judgment will not preclude
the petitioner to move the bank for regularisation of the loan
amount which is a matter left to the wisdom of the parties to the
contract.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
bkn/-