High Court Kerala High Court

Ahameed Kabeer vs Canara Bank Ottapalam Brnach on 18 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
Ahameed Kabeer vs Canara Bank Ottapalam Brnach on 18 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25481 of 2010(I)


1. AHAMEED KABEER,S/O.VEERAN HAJI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. CANARA BANK OTTAPALAM BRNACH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :18/08/2010

 O R D E R
                     P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
                        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                         W.P. (C) No. 25481 of 2010
                        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                   Dated, this the 18th day of August, 2010

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner availed two different loans from the respondent Bank

in connection with construction and improvement of the house, creating

security interest over the property in question. But, since the repayments

was not effected on time, the Bank proceeded with further steps under the

SARFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the default

was never wilful but because of some unforeseen pecuniary

circumstances. It is stated that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear

the entire liability within the shortest possible time, for which the benefit of

installments is sought for. The learned counsel further submits that, the

petitioner is not intending to avail the statutory remedy by resorting to the

steps under Section 17 of the Act.

3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank

submits that, the outstanding liability in respect of the first loan is

Rs.10,84,734/- whereas the outstanding liability in respect of the second

loan is Rs. 1,48,923/-

4. Considering the facts and circumstances and also the persuasive

submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds

W.P.(C) No. 25481 of 2010
2

it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to clear the liability in a phased

manner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to clear the entire

outstanding liability by way of ‘six’ equal monthly installments; the first of

which shall be effected on or before the 20th of September, 2010 to be

followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 10th of the

succeeding months. Subject to this, the coercive proceedings stated as

being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance, for the time

being. It is made clear that, if the petitioner commits any default in

clearing the outstanding liability as above, the respondents will be at liberty

to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in lump

sum.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

kmd