2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 89701
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SHAJU AK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 9926/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024/14TH KARTHIKA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 9926 OF 2024 PETITIONER: SHAJU A.K., AGED 40 YEARS, ALUVAKKARAN HOUSE, VATTANATHRA P.O., PACHALIPURAM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680302 BY ADVS.
SMT.P.M.BINDHUMOL SMT.R.MANEESHA RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695000
2 SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, VATTANATHARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, O/O THE ASSIASTANT REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), MUKUNTHAPURAM, THRISSUR, PIN – 680302.
3 VATTANATHARA SERVICE CO-OPERTAIVE BANK VATTANATHRA P.O., THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, PIN - 680302 BY ADVS.
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE(K/000516/1995)
SRI.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM(K/001758/1999)
SRI.V.T.LITHA(K/278/2006)
SRI.K.R.MONISHA(K/915/2013)
SRI.ASHIQUE NAZAR(K/002186/2023) SMT.ANIMA M., GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2024 The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made by the Vattanathra Service Co-operative Bank to the petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.
2. The Bank paid ₹5 lakhs to the petitioner as Loan in the year 2020. The petitioner states that though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of the financial advance, he could not pay the instalments promptly later. The repayment of loan fell into arrears later. It happened due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner.
3. Though the petitioner requested the Bank to permit the petitioner to repay the outstanding amounts in easy monthly instalments, the Bank authorities were not yielding. The authorities, instead, started coercive proceedings, invoking the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and issued Ext.P1 notice.
4. The petitioner states that he is still in a position to clear the outstanding amounts towards the loan, if sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly instalments. If the respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the petitioner, he will be put to untold hardship and loss.
5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Bank and denied all the statements made by the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2020. The petitioner committed default in repaying the loan.
6. The Bank repeatedly reminded the petitioner and required him to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the Bank had no other go, than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969. The impugned Ext.P1 notice was issued in these circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the Bank.
7. The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment soon and remit the balance outstanding amount immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount due to the Bank from the petitioner as on 05.11.2024 is ₹1,36,200/-.
8. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel representing the Bank. I have also heard the Government Pleader representing the 1st respondent.
9. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining the loan account initially. The default in repayment of the account occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. The petitioner has provide