IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37582 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. VARGHESE CHACKO, KATTUNGAL HOUSE, SANATHANAM WARD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. PREMA THOMAS, W/O.VARGHESE, KATTUNGAL HOUSE, SANATHANAM WARD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALAPPUZHA BRANCH, KABEER PLAZA, C.C.S.B.ROAD, MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA-688 011. 2. UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALAPPUZHA BRANCH, KABEER PLAZA, C.C.S.B.ROAD, MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA-688 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.37582 of 2010-W ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are husband and wife. They availed two loans from the respondent Bank to the tune of Rs.6.50 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs, respectively during the years 2006 and 2008. The repayment period of the loans in question, is 220 months and 180 months, respectively. Consequent to default committed in regular repayment of the monthly instalments, the respondents have initiated proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and the immovable property, which is the secured asset, has now been proceeded against. Invoking Section 14(1), the respondents have approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take over possession of the property. It is stated that the Advocate Commissioner had already issued notice to the petitioners requesting them to handover W.P(C) No.37582 of 2010-W 2 possession of the property in question. 2. According to the petitioners the coercive steps of recovery has now been pursued without considering their request for permitting regularisation of the loan account. Hence the petitioners seek interference of this Court to restrain the coercive steps of recovery and to permit payment of the overdue amounts in order to regularise the accounts. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the overdue amounts in both the accounts is around Rs.1.50 lakhs and Rs.1.25 lakhs, respectively. It is submitted that the loan accounts are in chronic default and inspite of repeated demands the petitioners have not effected payment of the defaulted amounts. It is further stated that the petitioners have approached the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, against the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act and obtained an interim stay. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the stay granted by that Forum W.P(C) No.37582 of 2010-W 3 now stands vacated and that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any relief from that Forum. 4. It is noticed that the petitioners have not challenged the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act at any stage when steps were taken on the basis of notice issued under Section 13(2) or under Section 13(4) of the Act. As such it is not proper or justified on the part of this Court to interfere in the matter or in interdicting with the proceedings now being pursued. 5. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any of the statutory remedies and that they are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. On the other hand, limited prayer is only to permit the petitioners to make payment of the defaulted amounts within a reasonable time. 6. Considering the fact that the repayment period of the loan is considerably lengthy, I am of the view that the indulgence can be shown in permitting regularisation of the W.P(C) No.37582 of 2010-W 4 account, eventhough interference on merits is not at all desirable. The petitioners shall withdraw the proceedings pending before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, which is filed challenging the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property, provided the petitioners remit the defaulted amounts in both the loan accounts (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of two succeeding months. The petitioners shall also make payment of the regular instalments due for the respective months, along with the above said payments. 8. If payment of defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above, the respondents shall permit the petitioners to continue payment of the future monthly instalments in W.P(C) No.37582 of 2010-W 5 accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 9. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of orders already issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to condition that the petitioners are precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab