High Court Kerala High Court

Rema.E vs Bank Of India on 10 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Rema.E vs Bank Of India on 10 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 5324 of 2010(M)


1. REMA.E,W/O.GOPINATHA KURUP.V,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. GOPINATHA KURUP.V,S/O.GOPALANKUTTY NAIR,

                        Vs



1. BANK OF INDIA,ZONAL OFFICE,KERALA ZONE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. BANK OF INDIA, 8/103,SILK STREET,

3. THE CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

                For Respondent  :SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

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

 Dated :10/03/2010

 O R D E R
                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
             ..............................................................................
                      W.P.(C) No. 5324 OF 2010
              .........................................................................
                      Dated this the 10th March, 2010



                                   J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are wife and husband respectively, who

had availed a housing loan from the respondent Bank, creating

security interest over the property in question. It is the

admitted case of the petitioners that because of some

unforeseen circumstances, the petitioners could not satisfy the

due amount, under which circumstance, the respondent Bank

proceeded with coercive steps against the petitioners invoking

the machinery under the SARFAESI Act, declaring the account of

the petitioners as ‘NPA’ followed by consequential steps , which in

turn forms the subject matter of challenge.

2. The learned Counsel for the respondent Bank on

instruction submits that as on 28.02.2010, a total sum of Rs.

13 lakhs is due so as to clear the entire amount towards loan

transaction by the petitioners.

3. However taking note of the specific circumstances that it

W.P.(C) No. 5324 OF 2010

2

was a housing loan which stands unrebutted and also the

persuasive submission made by the learned Counsel for the

petitioners, assuring that one more opportunity might be given to

the petitioners to clear the overdue amount to have the loan

account regularised, also assuring that the petitioners would

ensure that future E.M.Is would be satisfied without fail, this

Court finds it fit and proper that one more opportunity can be

granted to the petitioners. Accordingly, the housing loan

availed by the petitioners shall stand regularised and all

coercive proceedings shall stand stayed on condition that the

petitioners clear the entire overdue amount by way of two equal

monthly installments, the first of which shall be paid on or before

30.03.2010 and the next one on or before 30.04.2010. This

will be in addition to the liability of the petitioners to effect the

regular E.M.Is as originally stipulated, besides clearing the

arrears as above. It is further made clear that if the petitioners

commit any default in remitting the arrears or in the event of

committing two consecutive defaults in respect of the regular

E.M.Is payable, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed

W.P.(C) No. 5324 OF 2010

3

against the petitioners and their assets for realisation of the

entire outstanding liability in a lump sum, pursuing the coercive

steps, from the stage where it stands now.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk