Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 5122
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
ARACHANA NATH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE BANK OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) 42124/2022
REENA ABRAHAM, SRI.M.JITHESH MENON
The court established the principle of granting borrowers an opportunity to repay due amounts in installments as a measure to prevent undue distress.
Headnote:
Debt - Repayment Opportunity - N/A - Court allowed petitioner to repay outstanding amount of Rs.1,81,31,210 in 12 installments, reflecting on the principles of leniency in financial matters amidst default.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a borrower from the respondent bank, defaulted on repayment, leading to recovery proceedings by the bank. The petitioner sought an opportunity to repay the outstanding amount in installments.
Finding of the Court:
The court found merit in allowing the petitioner to repay the outstanding amount in 12 installments, taking into account the circumstances and the willingness of the bank to accommodate the petitioner.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to repay the defaulted amount in installments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for reasonable accommodation in cases of repayment default, reinforcing the principle that financial institutions should allow chances for repayment to avoid coercive measures.
Final Decision: Petition disposed of; respondent bank to accept repayment in 12 installments.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner as borrower from the respondent bank, has committed default in repayment. Consequently, proceedings have been initiated by the bank for recovery of the amounts due.
2. During the course of hearing, petitioner has confined the relief to an opportunity for repaying the outstanding amount in instalments.
3. It was submitted on behalf of the respondent bank that the petitioner committed default in repayment and the outstanding amount under a cash credit facility as on 22.11.2022 along with interest is Rs.1,81,31,210/-. It was further submitted that though proceedings for recovery have been initiated, as a matter of indulgence, the respondent bank is willing to accept repayment of the outstanding amount in limited instalments.
4. Even though, petitioner challenged Ext.P1 notice of sale, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the sale did not take place due to the absence of bidders.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner thereafter submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a reasonable instalment facility is granted to repay the amount and she relies upon relief No.1 sought in the writ petition.
6. I have heard Smt.Reena Abraham, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.M.Jithesh Menon, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
7. Having regard to the circumstances of the case and the situation now prevailing, apart from the submissions made as recorded above, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity to repay the outstanding amount in '12' instalments.
8. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the entire outstanding amount of Rs.1,81,31,210/- along with bank charges from the petitioner on the following conditions:
(i) The outstanding amount of Rs.1,81,31,210/- as on
22.11.2022 along with bank charges shall be repaid in '12'
equated monthly instalments.
(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 12.02.2023 and the remaining instalments shall be paid on or before the 12th day of the succeeding months.
(iii) In the event of default of any one instalment, the respondent bank shall be entitled to proceed in accordance with law.
(iv) In order to enable the petitioner to repay the entire amounts, all coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE RKM APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42124/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED
22/11/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
