Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Faizal P.S vs Syndicate Bank on 29 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1522 of 2010(M)


1. FAIZAL P.S,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SYNDICATE BANK, MANIPAL, PIN:576 104.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/

3. SYNDICATE BANK, KALPATHARU BUILDING,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :29/01/2010

 O R D E R
                P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
                  -----------------------------------------------
                          WP(C) No. 1522 of 2010
                        ---------------------------------------
               Dated, this the 29th day of January, 2010


                                J U D G M E N T

The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.4.32 lakhs from the

respondent Bank on 17.10.2006. The repayment could not be effected

on time as scheduled, which compelled the respondent Bank to proceed

with further steps invoking the remedy under the SARFAESI Act, which

is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents submits on

instructions, that the petitioner is a chronic defaulter and the overdue

amount itself will be nearly Rs.1.08 lakhs with interest and cost. The

learned counsel further submits that, if the petitioner clears the entire

overdue amount as above, the respondent Bank is ready and willing to

have the loan account regularized.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is

directed to repay the ‘overdue amount’ by way of ‘three’ equal monthly

instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 5th of

February, 2010, to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on

or before the 5th of the succeeding months. This will be in addition to the

liability of the petitioner to clear the regular EMIs as well. Subject to the

WP(C) No.1522/2010
2

above, all further coercive steps now being pursued against the petitioner

shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that, if any default is

committed by the petitioner in satisfying the overdue amount as above or

if any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular EMIs,

the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for

realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum, by pursuing such steps

from the stage, where it stands now.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
dnc


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.114 seconds.