High Court Kerala High Court

V.Haridas vs The Branch Manager on 16 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
V.Haridas vs The Branch Manager on 16 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 15502 of 2008(U)


1. V.HARIDAS, S/O.ICHARA VAREER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK

3. AUTHORISED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :16/06/2008

 O R D E R
                          S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                   ==================

                    W.P.(C).No. 15502 of 2008

                   ==================

               Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008

                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a defaulter in payment of loan amount due

from him to the respondent bank. Respondents have initiated

proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002,

for coercive recovery, which is under challenge in this writ

petition. He would submit that he has now paid Rs.8,40,000/-

and only about one lakh rupees is due as balance. The petitioner

submits that the respondents have taken possession of the

security interest, which is the dwelling house of the petitioner and

his family have been thrown to the street. Now the petitioner

undertakes to pay the balance amount in two instalments and

prays that possession may be returned to the petitioner subject

to that condition.

2. This is opposed by the standing counsel for the

respondents. He would submit that the petitioner had earlier

approached this Court and despite obtaining an order, he did not

w.p.c.15502/08 2

comply with the conditions in that order. Therefore, according to

him, the petitioner is not entitled to any more indulgence in the

matter.

3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.

4. Now that the petitioner has already paid more than 80

per cent of the amounts due, I feel that a lenient attitude can be

taken in the matter to enable the petitioner to pay off the balance

amount in instalments on conditions. Accordingly, this writ

petition is disposed of as follows:

The petitioner shall pay the balance amount (which

according to the respondents is Rs.1,60,000/-) in two monthly

instalments on 1.7.2008 and 2.8.2008. The petitioner shall be

put back in possession of the security interest within one week

from today. The undertaking that if he commits default in

payment of either of the two instalments on the due dates, he

will voluntarily surrender the security interest to the respondents,

is recorded. If the petitioner pays the instalments in time,

coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if

the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the

instalments or refuses to surrender possession on default, it

w.p.c.15502/08 3

would be open to the respondents to continue the proceedings as

now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or

proceedings in that regard, or to initiate contempt proceedings

for violation of the undertaking.

Sd/-

sdk+                                      S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

             ///True copy///




                            P.A. to Judge