Mr Parambath Nissar vs Indian Bank

C.S.Dias, J.

The writ petition is filed to allow the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in fifteen equated monthly instalments and regularise the loan account.

The petitioner’s case is that he had availed financial assistance from the respondent – Bank - by creating an equitable mortgage. Due to unforeseen circumstances, the petitioner could not pay the instalments on time. This Court by its judgment in WP(C) 5191/2023 has already dismissed a similar writ petition for non-compliance of the conditions in the said order. The respondent is threatening to take possession of the secured asset. The petitioner only requires a breathing time to pay off the overdue amount. Hence, the writ petition.

Sri.Bijumon E.A, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.S.Easwaran, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

Sri.S Easwaran, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner does not deserve any sympathy from this Court. He had already approached this Court by filing WP(C) 5191/2023, which was dismissed by this Court on 15.6.2023. Before the ink of the judgment has dried, the petitioner is again before this Court in the present writ petition. The writ petition is a sheer abuse of process of law because there is no change of circumstances for the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition. This writ petition may be dismissed with exemplary costs.

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 extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that this Court has already dismissed WP(C) 5191/2023 on finding no extraordinary circumstances and that the petitioner had not complied with the interim order passed by this Court, I do not find any change of circumstances for the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action. I do not find any ground to entertain the writ petition by exercising the plenary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this writ petition is to meet the same fate as WP(C) 5191/2023. Nonetheless, it would be up to the petitioner to invoke his statutory remedies under the Act.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed.