Santosh T.N. v. Bank of India

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019** ## **PETITIONER:** **SANTHOSH.T.N S/O. NARAYANAN KUTTY, THEKKEPADATH HOUSE, KURUMALA P.O., CHELAKKARA - 680 586.** **BY ADV. SMT.S.MUMTAZ** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, ZONAL OFFICE, KERALA ZONE, KALOOR TOWERS, KALOOR-KADAVANTHRA ROAD, COCHIN - 682 017.** **SRI.A.C.DEVY-SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 2** ## **JUDGMENT** Through this writ petition, the petitioner calls into question certain proceedings initiated and being pursued by the respondent Bank under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act ('the SARFAESI Act' for brevity). 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Bank. 3. As I proceed to consider the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner herein, I am conscious that I am jurisdictionally proscribed from entering into any enquiry or consideration of the legality or otherwise of the orders impugned in this writ petition on account of the imperative statutory provisions and the binding judicial pronouncements, especially that of the ## **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 3** Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Union Bank of India** **v. Satyawati Tondon** [2010 (8) SCC 110] and in **Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore and Another v. Mathew K.C.** [2018 (1) KLT 784]. I, therefore, cannot and do not propose to consider any of the legal contentions raised by the petitioner on its merits. 4. However, obviously being aware of this, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed that notwithstanding the limitations of jurisdiction as aforementioned, the petitioner may be granted some leniency or latitude in order to enable him to pay off the overdue amounts in installments. 5. I, therefore, enquired with the learned counsel for the Bank as to whether the request on the part of the petitioner can be allowed, especially on account of the fact that the Banks are only interested in recovering and not in maintaining and keep pending litigations and legal proceedings ## **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 4** against such recovery. The learned counsel has fairly submitted that the Bank is concerned about recovery at the earliest and that if the petitioner pays off the dues quickly, it would be to their interest also. 6. In view of the fact that the proceedings initiated by the Bank would consume time to culminate in total recovery and taking into account the financial constraints and burden that have been alleged and pleaded by the petitioner, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition allowing him an opportunity to pay off the overdue amounts demanded by the Bank. ## 7. The learned counsel for the Bank at this time submits that the petitioner can be allowed to pay off the overdue amount of **Rs.80,000/-** , as on **16/07/2019** , in not more than **8** instalments, commencing from **12/08/2019** and that the account can thus be regularised by the Bank. 8. The learned counsel for the ## **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 5** petitioner says that the petitioner is agreeable to the above offer made by the Bank and therefore that the writ petition may be ordered granting permission to the petitioner to pay off the amount in the manner as afore. 9. In such circumstances, I direct the petitioner to pay off the aforementioned overdue amount of **Rs.80,000/-** , as on **16/07/2019** , along with applicable charges and interest, in **8** equal monthly instalments commencing from **12/08/2019.** He shall also, in addition to this, pay the regular EMIs without fail. If such payment is made by the petitioner, his loan account would stand regularised and he would then be at liberty to service the account as per the terms of the loan sanctioned. It goes without saying that if there is any default in making the payment as directed above, the benefit granted under this judgment would stand vacated and the Bank will be at liberty to recover the entire liability from the ## **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 6** petitioner by continuing with the proceedings from the stage it is on this date. I make it clear that the directions in this judgment are peremptory in nature and that the petitioner will have to comply with the same meticulously. I caution the petitioner that no further requests for extension or modification of this judgment will be permitted, save in exceptional circumstances and that if the petitioner fails to comply with the directions herein, he will lose the benefit of this judgment. After I dictated this judgment, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the secured asset has already been taken possession of, the Bank may be directed to return the said asset once the overdues are paid as afore. It certainly goes without saying and the Bank will have to return the possession of the secured asset to the petitioner as soon as the payments as afore are completed. **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 7** The writ petition is ordered accordingly. **Sd/-** **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **JUDGE** MC/17.7.19 **WP(C).No.19114 of 2019 8** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF DEMAND 16.2.2015. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF LOAN ACCOUNT PASS BOOK FROM 30.6.2016 TO 14.3.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 1.3.2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REQUEST LETTER DATED 22.6.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.** ## **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** ## **NIL** **MC** **(TRUE COPY) PA TO JUDGE**