Suresh Kumar G Vs. the Chief Manager

Suresh Kumar G vs The Chief Manager

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 24, 2014

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1132305

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1132305
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Decided On: Feb 24, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suresh Kumar G

Respondent

The Chief Manager

Excerpt

.....arrangement. this was on the strength of security interest created over the property. admittedly, the petitioner could not satisfy the timely repayments, whereupon the bank declared the accounts as 'n.p.a.' and proceeded with steps under sarfaesi act, which are sought to be intercepted in this writ petition.2. the learned counsel for the bank submits on instructions that, the account was declared as n.p.a. on 30.06.2013 and no repayment was effected by the petitioner, but for filing some representations like exts.p2 and p5. the request made by the petitioner as per the representations was considered and answered in the 'negative' by the bank and the outcome was let known to them, then and there. no concrete proposals were submitted by the petitioner as to the manner in which the liability w.p.c.no.5207 of 2014 2 sought to be liquidated. it is also submitted that the bank had already approached the drt by filing o.a., which is stated as pending.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner does not intend to dispute the liability and the rights and liberties of the respondent bank in proceedings with the steps under sarfaesi act. it is stated that the petitioner has already identified a prospective purchaser and that negotiations are going on, so as to effect 'private sale' of the property concerned. it is assured and undertaken that the petitioner is ready to satisfy 10% of the outstanding liability within `one month' and the entire balance amount will be cleared within three months thereafter. it is in the said circumstances that the indulgence of this court is sought for, to sell the property.4. during the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the bank submits that, if the petitioner proves bonafides by depositing 10% of the due amount as assured within `one month', he can be given a further period of three months to satisfy the balance amount. w.p.c.no.5207 of 2014 3 in the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE24H DAY OF FEBRUARY20145TH PHALGUNA, 1935 WP(C).No. 5207 of 2014 (A) --------------------------- PETITIONER -------------------------- SURESH KUMAR G S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, SANTHOSH NIVAS, 61 MG STREET, ANDAMUKKAM WARD,THAMARAKKULAM , KALLUPALAM PO, KOLLAM-691001. BY ADVS.SRI.K.C.VINCENT SRI.P.S.GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER (AUTHORISED OFFICER) SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,REGIONAL OFFICER YMCA BUILDING, STATUE, MG ROAD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,MUNDAKKAL BRANCH SN COLLEGE JUCTION, KOLLAM-691001. R BY SRI.K.K.JOHN,SC,SOUTH INDIAN BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2402-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 5207 of 2014 (A) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION ORDER

DT.17.1.2012 OF RESPONDENT BANK. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DT.29.7.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

OF CONDITIONAL ATTACHMENT DT.20.11.2013 OF DRT ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DT1010.2013 ISSUED BY1T RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.7.11.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED102-2014 ISSUED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. EXHIBIT-P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ATTACHMENT PETITION DT.18.11.2013 FILED BY RESPONDENT BANK BEFORE DRT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE SMM P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.C. No.5207 OF2014--------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2014. JUDGMENT

The petitioner availed a loan of Rupees One Crore Ten Lakhs for purchasing the machineries and a cash credit loan of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty lakhs only) towards work capital arrangement. This was on the strength of security interest created over the property. Admittedly, the petitioner could not satisfy the timely repayments, whereupon the Bank declared the accounts as 'N.P.A.' and proceeded with steps under SARFAESI Act, which are sought to be intercepted in this writ petition.

2. The learned counsel for the Bank submits on instructions that, the account was declared as N.P.A. on 30.06.2013 and no repayment was effected by the petitioner, but for filing some representations like Exts.P2 and P5. The request made by the petitioner as per the representations was considered and answered in the 'negative' by the Bank and the outcome was let known to them, then and there. No concrete proposals were submitted by the petitioner as to the manner in which the liability W.P.C.No.5207 of 2014 2 sought to be liquidated. It is also submitted that the Bank had already approached the DRT by filing O.A., which is stated as pending.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner does not intend to dispute the liability and the rights and liberties of the respondent Bank in proceedings with the steps under SARFAESI Act. It is stated that the petitioner has already identified a prospective purchaser and that negotiations are going on, so as to effect 'private sale' of the property concerned. It is assured and undertaken that the petitioner is ready to satisfy 10% of the outstanding liability within `one month' and the entire balance amount will be cleared within three months thereafter. It is in the said circumstances that the indulgence of this Court is sought for, to sell the property.

4. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Bank submits that, if the petitioner proves bonafides by depositing 10% of the due amount as assured within `one month', he can be given a further period of three months to satisfy the balance amount. W.P.C.No.5207 of 2014 3 In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, recording the submissions and undertaking made on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to satisfy 10% of the disputed liability within `one month' from today and the balance amount shall be cleared within `three months' thereafter. If the petitioner commits any default in honouring the commitments as above, it will be open for the respondent Bank to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount due, from the stage where it stands now. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2014 Same Parties Suresh Kumar G vs The Chief Manager Same Subject Education Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon