J U D G M E N T

Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the SARFAESI Act) to recover the amounts due under a loan availed from the respondent bank. 2. The primary contention raised in this writ petition is that the petitioner is a Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) and is therefore entitled to the benefit of the notification issued by the Government of India in the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises read with the relevant circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India contemplating a framework for revival and rehabilitation of MSME. It is submitted that the initiation of SARFAESI proceedings without referring the matter for revival and rehabilitation is illegal and unsustainable in law.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that the issue is covered against the petitioner by the Division Bench of this court in P.K. Krishnakumar v. Indus Ind Bank; 2024 SCC OnLine Ker.6888 wherein this court had taken the view that when the borrower has not raised such claim before the declaration of the account as Non Performing Asset (NPA), such claim cannot be raised thereafter. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner addressed arguments seeking to distinguish the ratio of the judgment of this court in P.K. Krishnakumar (supra), on a consideration of the pleadings in this writ petition, it is clear that the petitioner had not raised any claim for rehabilitation prior to the declaration of the account as NPA. Therefore, going by the law laid down by the Division Bench following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pro Knits v. Board of Directors of Canara Bank and others; (2024) 8 SCR 140, I am of the view that the aforesaid contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted.

4. Faced with the situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to pay off the overdue amount in some instalments..

5. The learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that the overdue amount as on 16-02-2025 is Rs.1,22,13,000/- and the bank has no objection in some reasonable instalments being given to the petitioner to clear the overdue amount in instalments. It is submitted that the total outstanding amount is in excess of Rs.10 Crores.

6. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent bank to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.1,22,13,000/- along with bank charges from the petitioner and regularise the loan account of the petitioner in the following manner:

(i) The overdue amount of Rs.1,22,13,000/- together with any accrued interest and charges shall be repaid in twelve equated monthly instalments;

(ii) The first instalment shall be paid on or before 27-03-2025 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before last working day of each succeeding month;

(iii) Petitioner shall continue to pay the regular EMI’s / instalments along with the instalments directed above;

(iv) In the event of default of any one instalment, the respondent bank shall be entitled to proceed in accordance with the law;

(v) 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.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE AMG APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6483/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN SANCTION MEMORANDUM DATED

22.12.2015 FROM THE CANARA BANK, BADAGARA MAIN BRANCH Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.01.2010 TO 03.12.2024 IN RESPECT OF ACCOUNT NO. 0753768000234 ISSUED FROM THE BANK IDENTIFYING REPAYMENT Exhibit P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.01.2010 TO 03.12.2024 IN RESPECT OF ACCOUNT NO. 170003167106 ISSUED FROM THE BANK IDENTIFYING REPAYMENT Exhibit-P2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR