High Court Kerala High Court

Pookkodan Janaki vs The Chairman And Managing … on 16 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Pookkodan Janaki vs The Chairman And Managing … on 16 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25935 of 2008(K)


1. POOKKODAN JANAKI, POOKKODAN HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.SASIDHARAN, POOKODAN HOUSE,
3. M.SURESHAN, MULLAKANDY HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE MANAGER, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,

3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,  INDIAN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, SC,I.O.BANK

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :16/09/2008

 O R D E R
                         K. M. JOSEPH, J.
                  --------------------------------------
                  W.P.C. NO. 25935 OF 2008 K
                  --------------------------------------
               Dated this the 16th September, 2008

                            JUDGMENT

Petitioners challenge Ext.P10 notice issued under the

Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets &

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The property

belonging to the petitioners is proposed to be sold for realisation

of an amount of Rs.82,37,282/=. Exts.P8 and P9 are notices

issued to the petitioners. The case of the petitioners is that the

Bank sanctioned the One Time Settlement Scheme to the

petitioners by Ext.P5 and they were to pay Rs.20 Lakhs. The

Bank was to release the property. But, there was delay.

However, the petitioners remitted Rs.7 Lakhs. According to the

Bank, it was paid after one year. But, it is common case that the

petitioners have not paid Rs.13 lakhs payable under Ext.P5.

Apparently, this led to the Bank issuing Exts.P8 and P9 notices

and still further Ext.P10 sale proceedings.

2. I heard Shri M.P. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel

WPC.25935/08 K 2

appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the respondent Bank. Learned counsel for the Bank

also got instructions from the Bank. He submits that if the

petitioner pays a sum of Rs.15 Lakhs within two weeks from

today and another Rs.10 Lakhs within a period of thirty days

from today, the Bank will consider the claim of the petitioner for

One Time Settlement Scheme and the sale scheduled for

17.9.2008 will be adjourned. He further submits that along with

the payment of Rs.15 Lakhs, the petitioners must give a proposal

for settlement of the claim under the One Time Settlement

Scheme and the Bank will consider the same. Counsel for

petitioners submits that the petitioners will comply with the

aforesaid conditions. Recording the submissions of the parties,

the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:

The sale pursuant to Ext.P10 will stand adjourned. This is

on condition that the petitioners will pay a sum of Rs.15 Lakhs

(Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) within two weeks from today and

further that they will make an application for settlement under

WPC.25935/08 K 3

the OTS Scheme along with the payment of Rs.15 lakhs as

aforesaid and subject to the further condition that the petitioners

will pay a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs (Rupees Ten Lakhs) within thirty

days from today. If the petitioners commit default in payment of

either Rs.15 Lakhs or Rs.10 Lakhs as aforesaid or in the matter

of filing the application for settlement under the OTS Scheme, it

will be open to the respondent Bank to proceed to sell the

property of the petitioners.

Sd/=
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE

kbk.

//True Copy//
PS to Judge