Back
2011 Supreme(Online)(KER) 39627
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S. SIRI JAGAN, J
SHANMUGHAN P R – Appellant
Versus
THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 31254/2011
The court emphasized the importance of considering a petitioner's claim for statutory debt relief, highlighting that recovery actions must be paused pending such consideration.
Headnote:
Loan - Fisherman's Debt Relief - Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 - The court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's claim for relief under Ext.P6 circular and stay recovery proceedings pending that determination.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a fisherman, took a loan from the bank which went into arrears. The bank initiated recovery under the Securitisation Act. The petitioner claimed eligibility for debt relief under a circular from the Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
Finding of the Court:
The court found merit in the petitioner's claim and instructed the first respondent to evaluate the petitioner's request for benefits under the relief scheme within a month, while suspending recovery actions.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief under the Ext.P6 circular for debt relief and if the bank can proceed with the recovery of the loan against the petitioner during this evaluation.
Ratio Decidendi: The petitioner has a right to have their application for debt relief considered, and until that process is complete, recovery actions must be held in abeyance.
Final Decision: The court directed the first respondent to review the claim for relief under Ext.P6 and suspended recovery actions.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be a fisherman. He availed of a loan from the second respondent. Repayment of the loan fell in arrears. The bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 for recovery of the loan amounts due. The petitioner is challenging the same. The petitioner's contention is that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Ext.P6 circular issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, whereby a scheme for debt relief has been declared for fishermen. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is eligible for the benefits of the said scheme. The petitioner further submits that the petitioner has already filed a petition before the 4th respondent- Commission seeking this relief. The petitioner now seeks a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's claim for relief under Ext.P6 circular.
2. This is opposed by the counsel for the bank who submits that the petitioner has not produced any documents proving that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the said scheme.
Having heard both sides. I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner under Ext.P6 circular issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies Act and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then coercive recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance.
S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
