K.Vinod vs State Bank Of India

C.S Dias, J

The writ petition is filed to refer the petitioner and the respondents for mediation in order to settle the dispute between the parties.

The petitioner’s case is that he had availed financial assistance from the first respondent – Bank – by creating an equitable mortgage. The Bank has classified the account as Non-Performing Asset on 28.11.2020. The petitioner has also taken two other loans from the first respondent – Bank. The first respondent – Bank – had filed Ext P1 pre-litigation petition before the District Legal Service Authority, Kozhikode. Since notice was not served on the petitioner, he could not repay the instalments. Now, the Bank has initiated proceedings against the secured asset under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (in short, ‘Act’) demanding an amount of Rs.11,53,956/-. As the dispute between the parties can be settled, the petitioner prays that he and the respondents may be referred to mediation. Hence, the writ petition.

Heard; Sri.Edamana Narayanan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.R Anison, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Sri. M.R Anison, on instructions, submitted that the outstanding amount is more than Rs.11,00,000/-. The loan account has been classified as Non-Performing Asset in the year 2020. The respondents are not willing for exploring the possibility of any mediation. The petitioner may be relegated to exhaust his statutory remedies. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320), after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicial pronouncements rendered under the Act, has categorically declared that High Courts shall not, unless in extraordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the Act, in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the stand taken by the respondents, I do not find any extraordinary circumstances made out to entertain the writ petition by exercising the plenary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Nonetheless, it would be up to the petitioner to work out his statutory remedies in accordance with law.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies, in accordance with law.