High Court Kerala High Court

Godbin M.G. vs The Manager on 29 June, 2010

Kerala High Court
Godbin M.G. vs The Manager on 29 June, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19470 of 2010(G)


1. GODBIN M.G. , S/O.SRI.GOPALAKRISHNAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE MANAGER
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :29/06/2010

 O R D E R
               P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

                   -------------------------------

                  W.P.(C) No.19470 OF 2010

                   -------------------------------

            Dated this the 29th day of June, 2010

                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner availed a loan of Rs.2,06,000/- from

the respondent Bank, creating security over 20.30 Ares of land

and residential building situated thereon. It is the case of the

petitioner, that the loan was availed for the purpose of starting a

Diary Farm, but because of adverse circumstances, the petitioner

was not in a position to satisfy the liability on time, making him

defaulter, under which circumstance, the account was declared

as ‘NPA’ and the Bank proceeded with further steps under the

SARFAESI Act for realisation of the due amount, which in turn is

under challenge in this Writ Petition.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, inspite of

issuance of Ext.P2 notice, with regard to the claim of the

petitioner to extend the benefit under the Debt Relief Scheme,

2008, the respondent Bank has conveyed that 40% will be

wiped off and the remaining 60% of the liability has to be

remitted on or before 30.6.2010. In spite of this, the Bank has

W.P.(C) No.19470/2010

2

issued Ext.P3 Possession Notice, dated 15.6.2010, seeking to

realise a sum of Rs.2,73,756/- with interest and cost forthwith,

which is under challenge.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondent Bank, on instructions, submits that, as per the

scheme, 25% waiver is provided by the Central Government

while 15% waiver is provided by the Bank itself, thus

constituting a total of 40% waiver, as separately given in Ext.P2

itself. Since the last date stipulated by the Central Government

in this regard is 30.6.2010, the Bank is not in a position to

extend the said date further, simultaneously adding that, if the

date is extended, the Bank does not have any objection to allow

the said extension to the petitioner as well.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the plight of the petitioner as on the date is really pathetic,

particularly he having met with quite adverse circumstances, in

so far as his father was hospitalised in connection with the heart

W.P.(C) No.19470/2010

3

surgery, making him to incur heavy financial burden. This being

the position, the petitioner is not in a position to satisfy the

demand of remitting 60% of the amount forthwith, and hence

seeks for the benefit of installments.

5. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is

permitted to clear the entire outstanding liability in a phased

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

amount by way of ‘six’ equal monthly installments, the first of

which shall be effected within one month, i.e., on or before

30.7.2010, to be followed by similar instalments to be effected

on or before the 30th of succeeding months. It is made clear that

the benefit of the Debt Relief Scheme, or if the same is further

extended under any circumstance, or such other relief payable at

the hands of the respondent Bank, shall be given to the

petitioner as well, and the judgment passed by this Court will

not stand in the way of the parties for extending such relief. It

is also made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the

Bank for availing some or other concessions/allowances, if any,

W.P.(C) No.19470/2010

4

on which event, the same shall be considered and disposed of at

the sole discretion of the Bank. If any concession is provided

by the Bank, as stated above, the same shall be given ‘set off’ at

the time of last instalment. Further, if any default is committed

by the petitioner in effecting the instalments as above, the

respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps

for realisation of the amount in a lump sum.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

nj.