SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 43527

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
SABEEHA BASHEER – Appellant
Versus
BANK OF BARODA – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges Ext.P3 and P4 notices and also seek a direction to consider the application filed by the petitioner for a one time settlement. Ext.P3 is the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the SARFAESI Act), while Ext.P4 is the possession notice.

2. Smt.R.Rema, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent, upon instructions submitted that the total amount due from the petitioner is Rs.29,30,786/- and that the one time settlement offered by the petitioner for an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- is not acceptable or agreeable to the Bank. The learned counsel further submitted that the respondent is still willing to consider a settlement under one time settlement scheme, if the petitioner enhances the offer for settlement and files an application along with an amount to prove her bonafides.

3. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, there will be a direction to the petitioner to approach the respondent with a fresh proposal for one time settlement along with an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to show her bonafides.

4. If a proposal as mentioned above is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top