Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Rukiya

High Court Of Kerala|13 May, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner's son Musthaffa Muhammed availed a housing loan to the tune of `7,00,000 from the second respondent-bank in the year 2006. It is the chronic default committed by the petitioner's son in payment of instalments towards the said loan account that constrained the second respondent-bank to initiate steps against him under the SARFAESI Act (for short the 'Act'). Thereupon, a notice under section 13(2) of the Act was issued and it was followed by Ext.P2 notice of the Advocate Commissioner requiring the petitioner to give vacant possession of the property in question. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Though the petitioner attempted to dispute the liability as also the quantum in the writ petition, after arguing for some time the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly made the submission to provide the petitioner an opportunity to regularise the loan transaction. There cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that unless and until the outstanding dues are cleared, the said loan account cannot be regularised. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that considering the straitened circumstances explained vividly in the writ petition sufficient time may be granted to the petitioner and her son Musthaffa Muhammed to clear the outstanding dues. After hearing the rival submissions I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition as hereunder:-
The petitioner or the loanee of loan A/C. No.67019470106 shall pay the entire outstanding liability in six equal monthly instalments commencing from 3.6.2014. Needless to say that towards the loan in terms of the agreement regular EMI shall be paid without fail along with with the said instalments. In case of prompt payment in tune with the directions hereinbefore, the respondents shall take appropriate steps to regularise the loan account in question and permit the loanee, the son of the petitioner to pay the remaining liability in terms of the loan agreement. To enable such payment as directed above, the respondents shall keep in abeyance all coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P2 till the expiry of the above stipulated period. It is made clear that in case the petitioners commit default in payment of instalments as above, it will be open to the respondents to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
Sd/-
C.T. RAVIKUMAR (JUDGE) spc/ C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
JUDGMENT September, 2010 C.T. RAVIKUMAR (JUDGE) spc/ C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
JUDGMENT September, 2010
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rukiya

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
13 May, 2014
Judges
  • C T Ravikumar
Advocates
  • Sri Rajit