High Court Kerala High Court

Satheesh K.R vs Hdfc Bank Ltd on 6 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
Satheesh K.R vs Hdfc Bank Ltd on 6 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 26322 of 2009(I)


1. SATHEESH K.R,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. HDFC BANK LTD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. HDFC BANK LTD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.RAJESH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :06/11/2009

 O R D E R
                  C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  W.P.(C)No. 26322 of 2009
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
          Dated this the 6th day of November, 2009

                         J U D G M E N T

1. Challenge in this writ petition is against

proceedings initiated by the respondents under the

provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002 (SARFAESI Act). The petitioner had availed a loan

from the respondent Bank to the tune of Rs.55 lakhs during

the year 2007. According to the petitioner due to failure in

business activities, regular repayments in the loan account

could not be continued. Consequently the respondents

initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and Exts.P1

& P2 notices were issued. Challenging those proceedings

the petitioner had approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal

and an interim stay was granted on condition of deposit of

Rs.3 lakhs on or before 10.08.2009. Since the petitioner

could not remit the amount, an extension application was

W.P.(C)No. 26322 of 2009
-2-

filed, and extension was granted. Still the petitioner could

not effect payment of the said amount within the time

stipulated by the Tribunal. Eventhough he had tendered the

amount after the time stipulated, the Bank had refused to

accept it. Thereafter the respondent proceeded with

further steps and approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate

invoking Section 14 (1). An Advocate Commissioner was

appointed to take over possession of the secured assets. At

this stage the petitioner had filed this writ petition seeking

direction for permitting him to pay off the defaulted

installments in order to regularise the account.

2. This court through interim orders dated 18.09.09

and 25.09.09 directed the petitioner to make payment of

Rs.3 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs respectively. It is submitted by

both sides that the interim orders had already been

complied with and a total amount of Rs.8 lakhs was paid.

The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the

amount pertaining to the defaulted installments along with

over due interest and expenses at present outstanding, will

W.P.(C)No. 26322 of 2009
-3-

be around Rs.4 lakhs. Learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that he is ready and willing to pay whatever amount

due for regularising the loan account within a short period.

3. Under the above circumstances, I am of the

opinion that some indulgence can be shown in the matter

for permitting the petitioner to regularise the account by

paying defaulted amounts and in permitting the petitioner

to continue repayment in the loan account as per the

original schedule.

4. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of

directing the petitioner to make payment of the amount

pertaining to the defaulted installments along with over due

interest and expenses if any liable, in four (4) equal monthly

installments falling due on or before 15th December, 2009

and on or before the 15th day of succeeding three (3)

months. The petitioner shall make payment of the regular

installments due from December 2009 onwards along with

the above payments. If the petitioner makes payment of the

amounts as insisted above, the respondent shall permit him

W.P.(C)No. 26322 of 2009
-4-

to continue repayment in the loan account with respect to

the future installments as per the original schedule of

repayment.

5. It is made clear that on the event of failure to pay

any of the installments as stipulated as above, the

respondents will be free to proceed with further steps

pursuant to the order already issued by the Chief Judicial

Magistrate Court, and on any such event the petitioner will

be precluded from raising any further challenge against the

proceeding initiated under the SARFAESI Act, before this

court or before any other forum.

C.K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE

shg/