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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13340

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
RENJU SEBASTIAN – Appellant
Versus
THE BRANCH MANAGER, PALA BRANCH, KERALA GRAMIN BANK – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 6617 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI, SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI, SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI
For the Respondents: SRI. JAWAHAR JOSE, SC

The court can allow repayment of overdue amounts in installments while staying recovery proceedings under the Securitisation Act.

Headnote:The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, governs the recovery proceedings initiated by the bank due to the petitioner's default on a housing loan. The petitioner sought to repay the overdue amount in installments and regularize the loan accounts. The court accepted this request under conditions including the timely repayment of Rs.1,47,607/- in three installments. The court emphasized maintaining the status quo on recovery proceedings while allowing the petitioner to address overdue payments. Thus, the final decision indicated the court's willingness to assist the petitioner in regularizing the loan.

Table of Content
1. loan default and recovery notice. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. conditions for loan account regularization. (Para 4)

BASANT BALAJI J ======================

W.P.(C) No. 6617 of 2026 ========================

Dated 20th day of February, 2026 JUDGMENT The petitioner had availed a loan from the respondent Bank.

Subsequently, he committed default in repayment of the loan amount as per the agreed terms. In view of the said default, the respondent Bank initiated recovery proceedings against the secured asset under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002. Aggrieved by the measures so initiated by the respondent Bank under the said Act, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

2. During the hearing, the petitioner confined the relief to an opportunity to repay the overdue amount in instalments and to obtain regularisation of the loan accounts.

3. It was submitted on behalf of the respondent Bank that the petitioner committed default in repayment of the housing loan, and the total overdue amount as on 20.02.2026 is Rs.1,47,607/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Seven Only). It was further submitted that though proceedings for recovery have been initiated, and the possession of the property was taken, as a matter of indulgence, the respondent Bank is willing to accept repayment of the overdue amount in limited instalments and regularise the loan accounts. This is recorded.

4. Given the above, the petitioner can be granted an opportunity to repay the total overdue amount on the following conditions, and if they are met, to have the loan accounts regularised.

1. The balance overdue amount, Rs.1,47,607/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Six Hundred and Seven Only) along with any accrued interest, costs and charges, shall be paid in 3 equal monthly instalments starting from 10th March 2026 and subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before 10th of every succeeding months.

2. Petitioner shall continue to pay the regular EMIs/instalments along with the instalments directed above.

3. In the event of default of any one instalment, the respondent Bank shall be entitled to proceed for recovery, in accordance with the law;

4. All coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance to enable the petitioner to repay the entire amount directed above.

5. After making the payment of the overdue amount and the loan account is regularised, the possession of the secured assets shall be given back to the petitioner.

If the petitioner submits a fresh proposal under a One Time Settlement scheme, the respondent Bank shall consider the same on its merits, notwithstanding the fact that the earlier offer made by the petitioner was only Rs.8,00,000/-.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

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 Back to top