IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13299 of 2010(J)
1. SANTHOSH KUMAR.B.R., SUSHMA SADAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,
... Respondent
2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/REGIONAL MANAGER-
For Petitioner :SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :19/05/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P. (C) No. 13299 of 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 19th day of May, 2010
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved of the steps taken by the respondent Bank
under the SARFAESI Act, the petitioner had approached this Court
earlier by filing W.P. (C) No. 1616 of 2010, which led to Ext.P3
judgment. Taking note of the rival submissions and the request of the
petitioner to provide one more chance to have the loan account
regularized, this Court permitted the petitioner to clear the entire ‘over
due’ amount of about Rs. 6.20 lakhs by way of few installments, which
was to be satisfied in the manner as specified in paragraph 3 of Ext.P3,
making it clear that the entire over due amount was to be cleared on or
before 31st March, 2010. Subject to the clearance of the ‘over due’
amount as above, the loan was ordered to be regularized and the
petitioner was directed to effect the regular EMIs without fail.
2. The petitioner has now approached this Court challenging
Ext.P5 proceedings issued by the Bank seeking to satisfy a total sum of
Rs, 12,51,475/- with interest and other expenses, which according to
the petitioner is not correct or sustainable. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that amount shown in Ext.P5 is the very same
amount as shown in Ext.P1. Despite satisfying a portion of outstanding
W.P. (C) No. 13299 of 2010
: 2 :
liability i.e. nearly Rs. 3.5 lakhs (correctness of the amount is seriously
disputed by the respondent) , the same has not given credit to the loan
account while issuing Ext.P5 proceedings; submits the learned counsel.
3. The learned counsel for the Bank on instructions submitted
that the petitioner was already given a chance by this Court for
regulairsing the loan account by satisfying over due amount, which in
fact was not availed by the petitioner. In the said circumstances,
issuance of Ext.P5 is not liable to be assailed, however adding that at
all any amount remitted by the petitioner has been left out, the same of
course will be given credit to and only the balance amount will be
recovered from the petitioner.
4. Taking note of the facts and circumstances, the respondent
Bank is directed to intimate the petitioner as to the balance/outstanding
liability under the loan transaction within one week of receipt of a copy
of this judgment. On such event, the outstanding liability shall be
cleared by the petitioner by way of ‘four’ equal monthly installments.;
the first of which shall be effected on or before 20th June, 2010 and the
remaining installments to be effected on or before 20th of the
succeeding months. Subject to the above, the coercive proceedings
stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in
abeyance. It is made clear that if the petitioner commits any default in
W.P. (C) No. 13299 of 2010
: 3 :
effecting the installments, as aforesaid, the respondent Bank will be at
liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount
in lump sum, from the stage where it stands.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
kmd
W.P. (C) No. 13299 of 2010
: 4 :