IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1105 of 2010(K)
1. SUTHAN.K.K., KALLURUMBIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE GENERAL MANAGER,
... Respondent
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :20/01/2010
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
-----------------------------
W.P(C) No. 1105 of 2010-K
------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.2,60,000/- from the
second respondent in the year 1996. But he was not at all eager to
repay the due amount on time, which made him a defaulter. In such
circumstances, the bank declared the loan account as ‘NPA’ and
proceeded with further steps invoking the provisions under the
SARFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is entitled to the benefit of ‘One Time Settlement’ and
hence seeks for a direction to the concerned respondents to furnish
the statement of accounts regarding the balance amount due and to
grant sufficient time to settle the arrears.
3. The learned counsel for the bank submits on
instructions, that the petitioner was provided with an opportunity to
have the benefit of ‘One Time Settlement’ way back in the year 2005.
However, in spite of the benefit given by the bank, the petitioner
remitted only a sum of Rs.50,000/- and issued three cheques which
W.P(C) No. 1105 of 2010-K 2
however were returned as dishonoured. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that, subsequently the petitioner effected the
cash payment of Rs.1.5 lakhs, thus effecting a total payment of
Rs.2,00,000/- lakhs. The learned counsel for the bank submits that
the benefit of ‘One Time Settlement’ given to the petitioner in the
year 2005 is no more in operation and cannot be revived at this
distance of time. However, the learned counsel fairly submits that
yet another ‘Special Recovery Scheme’ is available and valid till
31.1.2009 and if the petitioner so chooses, he can avail the benefit
thereunder, provided the liability is satisfied in accordance with the
stipulation under the Scheme; upon which he may be entitled to get
a sizable reduction to an extent of about Rs.3,00,000/-.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not in a position to satisfy the liability on or before 31st
of this month and that the petitioner would like to clear the entire
liability within three months, for which alternate arrangements are
being made. In response to the said submission, the learned
counsel for the bank submits that the actual liability under the loan
transaction will be nearly Rs.11.94 lakhs, with interest and cost.
5. In the above facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is
W.P(C) No. 1105 of 2010-K 3
disposed of, permitting the petitioner to wipe off the entire liability
under the loan transaction on or before 31st of March, 2010. This
will not preclude the petitioner from approaching the bank directly
for some or other concession, allowance or the benefits of any
scheme, if it is in existence. Subject to the above, all further
coercive steps shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that,
if the petitioner does not hounour the commitment as above, the
respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for
realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum, form the stage
where it stands now.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
//True Copy//
P.A to Judge
ab