IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 6366 of 2011(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALIYAR.P.A,S/O.ABDULKHADER,PEEDIKAKUDY HOUSE,PARAPPURAM,PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.AYPE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK,NMGB TOWERS,PALLKUNNU,KANNUR.PO. PIN-678702. 2. THE MANAGER,NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK, PERUMBAVOOR-683542. ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FOR R1 SRI.K.M.ANEESH FOR R1 SRI.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR (KALIYANAM) FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 6366/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.13.8.2010. PII. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD.13.10.10. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 6366 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 4 th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of the loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks the facility to pay off the amounts in instalments. 2. This Court has passed several interim orders as follows; 1.3.2011: “Standing counsel appearing for the respondents seeks time to get instructions. Meanwhile, the petitioner shall not be dispossessed from the property pursuant to any proceedings initiated under Section 14(1), if not already dispossessed, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs within three weeks from today. Post after three weeks”. 23.3.2011: “It is submitted that the condition stipulated has already been complied with. There is no representation for the respondent. Hence interim stay is extended for a period of two weeks.” 11.4.2011: “The interim stay granted against dispossession will continue till 31.5.2011 subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) on or before 30.4.2011 and a further sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) on or before 25.5.2011.” Post on 30.5.2011.” 2.6.2011: “Extension sought for is opposed. However, considering the fact that the petitioner had already deposited a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs, after filing of the writ petition, the time stipulated for payment of the w.p.c.6366/11 2 balance amount of Rs. 1 lakh is extended till 30.6.2011, making it clear that no further extension will be granted under any circumstances and on failure, the writ petition will be dismissed. Post on 4.7.2011. Interim order will continue till then.” The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioner has paid ` 4 lakhs. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank also, who opposes the prayer of the petitioner for instalment facility. 3. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: As per the interim order, the petitioner has paid ` 4 lakhs. The petitioner shall pay the balance amount due in three equal monthly instalments starting from 1.8.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalments on the due dates without default, coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts due shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondents to take coercive proceedings for recovery of the amounts due without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge