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) 13708

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
SOBHA K – Appellant
Versus
SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, CALICUT NORTH SCB GROUP – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 6320 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV, SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN, SMT.S.PARVATHI
For the Respondents: SHRI.AKSHAY VENU, SMT. C.S SHEEJA (GP)

A borrower may be permitted to repay overdue amounts in installments, and coercive proceedings can be suspended during repayment, ensuring compliance with applicable legal procedures.

Headnote:Court analyzed the procedure for loan recovery under applicable provisions of law and the facts concerning sale proceedings initiated by the respondent Bank against the petitioner for overdue payment. The court noted the absence of a reserve price as a basis for disputing the sale. The court decreed to allow the petitioner to repay the debt in 18 instalments and to keep all coercive actions in abeyance while emphasizing adherence to payment schedules. The sale proceedings are subject to the outcome of future compliance with respect to loan account regularization.

Table of Content
1. petition to set aside sale notice due to invalidity. (Para 1)
2. discussions on repayment and financial hardship of the petitioner. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court's directive to allow structured repayment and suspension of coercive action. (Para 4 , 5)

JUDGMENT The petitioner is before this Court seeking to set aside Ext.P2 sale notice proposing to sell the property of the petitioner for recovery of amounts due under a loan availed by the petitioner from the 2nd respondent Bank. It is the case of the petitioner that the sale proceedings are invalid as no reserve price has been fixed in respect of the property.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits that the sale in terms of Ext.P2 was scheduled on 17.02.2026 and no sale took place. It is submitted that the overdue amount as on 18.02.2026 in the loan availed by the petitioner is Rs.12,24,126/- and the Bank has no objection in granting some instalments to the petitioner to clear the liability.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a widow and the petitioner may be permitted to clear the overdue amount in some easy instalments.

4. Having regard to the circumstances of the case and the submissions made as recorded above, I am of the view that the petitioners can be granted an opportunity to repay the overdue amount along with any accrued interest, costs and charges in 18 instalments and thereafter, if the amount so directed is repaid within the time as directed above, to have the loan account regularised.

5. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the respondent Bank to accept repayment of the entire overdue amount of Rs.12,24,126/- (Rupees twelve lakhs twenty four thousand one hundred and twenty six only) along with any accrued interest, costs and charges from the petitioners and regularise the loan account of the petitioner in the following manner:

i. The petitioner shall pay the overdue amount of Rs.12,24,126/-

(Rupees twelve lakhs twenty four thousand one hundred and twenty six only) along with any accrued interest, costs and charges in 18 equated monthly instalments;

ii. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 30.03.2026 and the subsequent instalments shall be paid on or before the last working day of every succeeding months;

iii. Petitioner shall continue to pay the regular EMI’s / instalments on the due dates without fail;

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.

It is made clear that if the Bank is called upon to bring the mortgaged property to sale again, such sale shall be held also taking note of the law laid down by this Court in Haridasan K. B. v. Palliyakkal Service Co- operative Bank (Ltd.) No.2232 [ 2022 KHC 1063] referred to in ground B of the writ petition.

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