W.P.(C.) No. 9787 of 2025 1 2025:KER:27718 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 9787 OF 2025 PETITIONERS: AJU VARGHESE RAJU, AGED 40 YEARS S/O. LATE RAJU JOSE, NEDUNILATH HOUSE, MARADU, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682304 BY ADVS. SADCHITH.P.KURUP C.P.ANIL RAJ SIVA SURESH B.SREEDEVI ATHIRA VIJAYAN RESPONDENTS: 1 CANARA BANK, REP. BY REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682035 2 CANARA BANK, SPECIALIZED SME BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, KODAI TOWER, EDAPALLY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682024 SRI. M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C.) No. 9787 of 2025 2 2025:KER:27718 GOPINATH P., J. --------------------------------- W.P.(C.) No. 9787 of 2025 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2025 JUDGMENT The petitioner is before this Court stating that when petitioner filed Ext.P5 request for conversion of Over Draft facility into term loan account, the bank has given a reply by Ext.P6 terming the same as a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that though such a caption is seen on Ext.P6, the body of Ext.P6 indicates that the request of the petitioner for conversion of over draft account into a term loan facility has been rejected by the Bank. 3. Since the wrong caption has been put on Ext.P6, the Bank will again issue a fresh reply to Ext.P5 within a time frame to be specified by this Court. 4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the W.P.(C.) No. 9787 of 2025 3 2025:KER:27718 respondent Bank, this writ petition stands disposed of directing that notwithstanding issuance of Ext.P6 reply to Ext.P5 request, Ext.P5 shall be reconsidered by the Bank by its competent authority of the respondent Bank and a reply shall be furnished to the petitioner. I make it clear that I am directing the reconsideration of Ext.P5 only on account of the fact that Ext.P6 is seen captioned as a notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act and not for any other reason. The competent authority of the respondent Bank shall endeavour to consider Ext.P5 and issue a fresh reply to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- GOPINATH P., JUDGE sjb/27.03.25 W.P.(C.) No. 9787 of 2025 4 2025:KER:27718 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9787/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC NO. 20304/2024 DATED 9.08.2024 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.11.2024 IN IA NO.1/2024 IN WPC NO.20304/2024 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 03.02.2025 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.02.2025 GIVEN TO THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 5.03.2025 GIVEN TO THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE 13(2) NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 07.03.2025 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FROM 01.06.2024 TO 15.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE APPLICANT