High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed of with directions as st...

Subash R. v. Kerala Financial Corporation and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 10548 of 2025
Neutral Citation:2025:KER:30486

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
Judgment Date
2025-04-08
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is disposed of with directions: the petitioner is directed to make an appropriate representation before the 2nd respondent within one week from receipt of a copy of the judgment; the 2nd respondent shall consider the representation in accordance with law within one month thereafter. Until orders are passed and communicated, there shall be no coercive proceedings against the secured asset. The court underscores that the relief sought—release from loan liability on fair value—will be examined through a fresh representation and proper valuation, with the petitioner retaining the right to pursue relief as per law.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed of with directions as stated above.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Subash R

Respondents

  • Kerala Financial Corporation
  • The Manager, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch, Kerala Financial Corporation
  • Sundaran B Chaithanya

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Vishnu Bhuvanendran
  • • B.Anusree
  • • Vineetha A.A.
  • • Sreelakshmi B.
  • • Abdul Fathah
  • • Arya B.
  • • Noy al Johny

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Adv. Venugopal M.R., SC
  • • Dhanya P.Ashokan (Sr.)
  • • S. Muhammad Alikhan
  • • Anjana S. Raj

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition (Civil) filed by Subash R. challenges the action of the Kerala Financial Corporation (KFC) and its recovery machinery under a loan for which Subash R. stood as guarantor. The 3rd respondent had availed a loan from the KFC, secured by the petitioner’s property (30 acres in Re.Sy.No.52, Puthoor Village, Kollam). After default in installments, KFC initiated recovery proceedings. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking (i) certiorari to set aside Ext.P4 and to direct respondents 1 and 2 to reconsider the petitioner’s request; (ii) mandamus to release the petitioner from loan liability on payment of an amount revalued by the 1st respondent for the property; (iii) mandamus to consider Exhibit P5 and P6 representations; (iv) mandamus not to proceed with coercive measures against the property as per Ext.P1; (v) mandamus not to report the liability to credit bureaus affecting the petitioner’s CIBIL score. Respondents filed a statement; it reveals that per Ext.P4 the petitioner was informed to appear for a hearing on 20.06.2024. During the hearing, the bank valued the security at Rs.52.50 lakhs (valuation dated 28.03.2024) and demanded remittance of Rs.52.50 lakhs plus an additional Rs.11.88 lakh to maintain security for the balance loan (or substitution of security worth Rs.64.38 lakhs). The petitioner contends this valuation is not fair value and seeks reconsideration, offering to submit details of fair value. The court directed the petitioner to submit a representation within one week and, if received, to be considered within one month; until orders are passed, there shall be no coercive proceedings. The petition is disposed of accordingly, with directions for a fresh representation and for consideration thereof, and a stay on coercive action pending decision.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount referred to in the statement is not based on fair value of the property and requires reconsideration. The petitioner proposes to submit details of the fair value to support a release of the mortgaged asset on payment of the value arrived at through fair valuation. He contends that Ext.P4, which imposes onerous terms for release, is not based on fair assessment and seeks a fresh reconsideration by the 2nd respondent. In the light of this, the petitioner prays for (i) setting aside Ext.P4, and (ii) release of the collateral on terms reflecting fair value, with appropriate adjustments and without coercive action until a fair resolution is reached. The petitioner also requests consideration of Exhibits P5 and P6 in connection with representations aimed at fair valuation and release of liability on reasonable terms.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents (KFC and its officer) state that, following the court’s order, the petitioner was asked to appear before the Assistant General Manager on 20.06.2024. During proceedings, the bank informed the petitioner that the security’s value, as per valuation dated 28.03.2024, is Rs.52.50 lakhs. To release collateral, the petitioner must remit Rs.52.50 lakhs, and to maintain security for the balance loan, either remit a further Rs.11.88 lakhs or substitute additional security worth Rs.64.38 lakhs. They argue that the amounts reflect the bank’s assessment of value and risk, and that release is contingent on payment or substitution as per policy. The respondents urge that representations (Exhibits P5 and P6) may be considered in accordance with law, but the lex talionis of fair value must balance creditor risk and borrower interests. The 8th paragraph confirms compliance with the court’s order, including the hearing outcome and the need for a fresh representation process, subject to law.”},

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Subash R. v. Kerala Financial Corporation and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 1 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN TUESDAY, THE 8[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` SUBASH R, AGED 49 YEARS S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, CHERUVILAPUTHEN VEEDU, VENDAR P.O, PUTHOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM., PIN - 691507 ``` ``` BY ADVS. VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN B.ANUSREE VINEETHA A.A. SREELAKSHMI B. ABDUL FATHAH ARYA B. NOYAL JOHNY ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION BRANCH OFFICE, A.G.C COMPLEX, BEACH ROAD KOLLAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER- 691001 ``` - **`2 THE MANAGER`** ``` STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695033 ``` - **`3 SUNDARAN B CHAITHANYA, VALLAM, KOTTARAKKARA PO, KOLLAM., PIN - 691506`** ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 2 : ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ADV. VENUGOPAL M.R.,SC DHANYA P.ASHOKAN (SR.)(K/001671/2000) S. MUHAMMAD ALIKHAN(K/000644/2020) ANJANA S. RAJ(K/001318/2024) ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 3 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **JUDGMENT** The 3[rd] respondent had availed a loan from the Kerala Finance Corporation (KFC)- 1[st] respondent, for which the petitioner stood as guarantor and mortgaged his property having an extent of 30 Ares comprised in Re.Sy.No.52 of Puthoor Village, Kottarakkara Taluk, Kollam. The 3[rd] respondent committed default in payment of installments and the 1[st] respondent initiated recovery proceedings. The petitioner apprehends that his property will be proceeded against by the KFC, which may result in the reduction of his CIBIL score. The petitioner has therefore made a representation to the KFC to release the property ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 4 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** which he had offered as secured asset. On receipt of the representation, the 2[nd] respondent passed Ext.P4 proceedings. Aggrieved by the stand taken by the 2[nd] respondent in Ext.P4, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs. “i. issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order setting aside exhibit P4 order and to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the request of the petitioner afresh; ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to release the petitioner from the loan liability, on payment of the amount revalued by the 1[st] respondent for the property of the petitioner. iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 5 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** order, directing the 1[st] respondent to consider exhibit P5 and P6 representations of the petitioner; iv. issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to proceed with the coercive proceedings of the property in question belonging to the petitioner as per Ext.P1 Notice. v. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to report the liability of the petitioner to credit bureaus, thereby adversely affecting his CIBIL score.” 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and paragraph No.8 thereof reads as follows: “8. In compliance with the said order of this Hon'ble Court, the Corporation informed the petitioner to appear ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 6 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** before the Assistant General Manager on 20.06.2024 for a hearing. During the the was hearing, petitioner informed that the value of the security property owned by him, as per the valuation dated 28.03.2024 conducted by the Corporation, amounts to Rs.52.50 lakhs. It was further conveyed that, in order to release the collateral security in question, the petitioner must remit an equivalent amount of 52.50 lakhs and, to maintain security coverage for the balance loan, based on the value of the security property to be released and the present outstanding balance, he must remit an additional amount of Rs.11.88 lakh. Otherwise, he is required to substitute additional security worth Rs.64.38 lakhs.” ## 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 7 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** submits that the amount referred to in the statement is not based on the fair value of the property and requires a re-consideration. It is submitted that the petitioner will make necessary request before the 2[nd] respondent showing the details of the fair value of the property so that the mortgaged property of the petitioner can be released based on the amount arrived at on the basis of the fair value. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the petitioner to make appropriate representation before the 2[nd] respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If such representation is received, the 2[nd] respondent shall consider the same, in accordance with law, within ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 8 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** one month therefrom. Till such time orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner, there shall not be any coercive proceedings as against the secured asset of the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. **Sd/-** **MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** SB ``` WP(C) NO. 10548 OF 2025 : 9 : ``` ``` 2025:KER:30486 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`APPENDIX`** ## **`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`** ``` Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.08.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ``` ``` Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.02.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CORPORATION. ``` ``` Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.06.2024 IN WP(C). NO. 14051/2024. ``` ``` Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT CORPORATION DATED 20.06.2024. ``` ``` Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.07.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CORPORATION. ``` ``` Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 05.09.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT CORPORATION. ```