HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
WILLIAM VIRJULIUS MERCIER – Appellant
Versus
THE MANAGER – Respondent
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner had availed of a housing loan of Rs.28 lakhs from the respondent Bank. As security, the property purchased itself was mortgaged. Default was committed and as a result Bank has initiated SARFAESI proceedings. Finally, bank has issued Ext.P5 possession notice. It is at this stage, the petitioner has approached this court requesting that he be given a reasonable time to settle the liability. Petitioner has also produced Exts.P3 and P4 newspaper advertisements given by him for the the sale of the property and according to him if 3 months time is granted he will sell the property and will discharge the liability.
2. I heard the standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank. The counsel for the respondent Bank justified the action initiated by the Bank.
3. True, the petitioner is a defaulter and the Bank is entitled to have initiated action for recovery of its dues also. However, petitioner only seeks 3 months time to discharge the whole liability. In WPC.No. 19709/2012 :2 :
my view, when such a request is made and as the mortgage is still remaining in force, Bank will not be prejudiced, if 3 months period is allowed to the petitioner.
4. Therefore, I direct th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.