Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 11899
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
SREENIVAS – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN BANK – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4170 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.PADMA LAKSHMI, SMT.RAIJA C. KAREEM
For the Respondents: SRI. BINOY VASUDEVAN, SC
A guarantor must comply with court directives regarding loan installments and can seek remedy at the Debts Recovery Tribunal for grievances related to enforcement actions.
Headnote:The case involves a challenge against a notice issued under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner, a guarantor, seeks to regularize loan dues through 30 instalments. The court reaffirmed prior directions concerning payment from a previous judgment. Key issues pertain to the petitioner’s remedies under the Act. The court clarified the statutory remedies available and affirmed the previous judgment's directives.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. previous court's directive on loan repayment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. guarantor's statutory remedies. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 17th day of February, 2026)
The petitioner’s wife had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 20044 of 2025, which was disposed of on 13.06.2025 directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.10 lakhs on or before 11.07.2025, and to pay the balance amount in 12 equal monthly instalments commencing from
11.08.2025.
2. The present writ petition is filed by the guarantor challenging Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002. A further direction is sought to regularize the loan account by permitting the petitioner to clear the loan dues in 30 instalments. The filing and disposal of W.P.(C) No. 20044 of 2025 has been suppressed in the present writ petition. As noticed earlier, pursuant to the above said judgment, the petitioner was bound to remit Rs.10 lakhs and thereafter pay the instalments from 11.08.2025 onwards.
3. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any of the measures taken under Section 13 (4) of the Act, being a guarantor, it is open to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. If the petitioner intends to save the secured property, the petitioner shall strictly comply with the directions issued in W.P.(C) No. 20044 of 2025.
Given this, the writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
