Radha v. Dena Bank

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/28TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 6079 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- RADHA AGED 51 YEARS WIFE OF SWAMINATHAN, KANNATH HOUSE, PANYUR POST POLPULLY, PALAKKAD - 678 552.

BY ADVS.SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN SMT.SHAMSEERA. C.ASHRAF SMT.ANU JACOB SRI.T.U.SUJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------- DENA BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICE, DENA BANK PALAKKAD BRANCH, FIRST FLOOR, SURYA CITY SUDEVAN ROAD, SULTANPET, PALAKKAD 678 001.

R. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE R. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE R. BY ADV. SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM R. BY ADV. SMT.K.R.MONISHA R. BY ADV. SRI.BOBY C. BABY R. BY ADV. SRI.ANOOP BHASKAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 6079 of 2015 (H) -------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED JANUARY 17 2015 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- -------------------------------------- NIL // True copy // PA to Judge das

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 6079 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 19th day of March, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who had availed of an overdraft facility from the respondent bank, defaulted in repayment of the same. Consequently, the respondent bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act', to recover the loan amounts. Ext.P1 is the possession notice issued to the petitioner under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the overdue amounts.

2.

I have heard Sri.Jacob Sebastian, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I note that the sole prayer of the petitioner is to permit her to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I

-2W.P.(C). No. 6079 of 2015 dispose the writ petition with the following directions:- (i) The total overdue amount, from the petitioner to the respondent bank, is stated to be Rs.3,14,860/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,14,860/- together with accrued interest in six equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 30.03.2015, and continues to keep up the regular installment payments as per the original loan schedule, then the recovery steps initiated against her by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.

(ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against her from the stage at which they presently stand.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das