KAIRALI PURUSHA SWASRAYA SAMITHI Vs. AUTHORISED OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2. Petitioner claims to be a self help group formed by 15 fishermen, a list of which is Ext. P1. From Annexure R1 produced along with the statement filed by the standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2, it appears that for the purpose of acquisition of the inboard unit of country fishing boat with engine and other utensils, having a total investment of Rs. 20 lakhs, the group availed of a loan of Rs. 10 lakhs from the respondent bank. Default was committed in repayment and therefore, the account was classified as NPA. Thereafter, SARFAESI proceedings were initiated and finally, Bank obtained an order from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Alappuzha under S. 14 of the said Act. Thereafter, the Advocate Commissioner appointed by that Court issued Ext.P5 notice requiring the petitioner to hand over possession of the secured asset to him. Simultaneously, the debt was advised for revenue recovery and accordingly Ext. P8 notice under S. 7 of the Revenue Recovery Act was issued. It is challenging Exts. P5 and P8, the Writ Petition was filed.

(2.) From the contentions raised by the counsel for the petitioner, it is evident that the petitioner filed an application for debt waiver before the 4th respondent Commission. Although copy of that application has not been put to use, Ext. P3 receipt issued by the Commission acknowledging receipt of the application has been produced. It is stated that the said application is pending and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of moratorium as declared by the Government as per Ext. P4. Though the period of Ext. P5 has expired, counsel says that the period has been extended thereafter and that it is still in force.

(3.) Submissions made by the learned counsel for the bank is that the loan availed of by the petitioner group and the debt in question are not covered by the provisions of the Kerala Fishermen Debt Relief Commission Act, 2008 and therefore, pendency of the application before the 4th respondent or Ext. P4 notification cannot prevent the bank from proceeding for recovery of its dues.