Kerala High Court: Devan Ramachandran, J. granted peremptory order for the payment of the recovery amount in installments.
A writ petition was filed in order to question proceedings initiated and being pursued by the respondent Bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002.
The petitioner had to pay the overdue amount demanded by the Bank through the orders made under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The Court proceeded with the writ application and stated that “I am conscious that I am jurisdictionally proscribed from entering into any enquiry or consideration of the legality or otherwise of the orders impugned in this writ petition on account of the imperative statutory provisions and the binding judicial pronouncements and therefore, cannot and do not propose to consider any of the legal contentions raised by the petitioner on its merits.”
But the court after enquiring with the authorized officer for the respondent allowed the request of the petitioner and granted leniency in the payment to pay overdue amount in the installments with the strict instructions, “that directions in this judgment are peremptory in nature and that the petitioner will have to comply with the same meticulously. I caution the petitioner that no further requests for extension or modification of this judgment, save in exceptional circumstances, will be permitted and that if the petitioner fails to comply with the directions herein, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and she will also be foreclosed from challenging the measures/proceedings taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act and impugned in this writ petition before any other alternative Forum or Court”.[Sreeja v. Trissur District Co-Operative Bank Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine Ker 1602, decided on 20-05-2019]
