IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 27203 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- PUSHKARAN.T., AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.VASU, KADAMATTUVELIYIL HOUSE, SOUTH ARYAD, AVALOOKUNNU P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. ALAPPUZHA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, A-67, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA-688 524. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTRICE CENTRAL GOVT.SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI. R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.27203 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against coercive steps initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The petitioner availed loan from the 1st respondent to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- during the year 2009 by mortgaging immovable property belonging to him. Consequent to default committed in effecting regular repayments, the 1st respondent initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. On invoking Section 14(1) of the Act the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court was approached and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed by that court to take over possession of the property. Ext.P3 is the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner. 2. Eventhough this court was not inclined to interfere in view of the effective alternate remedy available, by way of a gesture of indulgence, dispossession of the W.P.(C).27203/10-A -2- petitioner from the property was stayed subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.30,000/-. It is submitted that the petitioner had complied with the condition. Inspite of service of notice from this court the 1st respondent has not chosen to enter appearance or contest the case. 3. The petitioner makes a fervent appeal to this court, expressing his financial difficulties, for permitting regularisation of the loan account. It is offered that the petitioner will pay off the entire defaulted amounts along with interest and expenses if any due, within a short period. Request of the petitioner is to permit payment of future installments on a regular basis, in terms of the original schedule of repayment, on the basis of an undertaking that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and that he will not avail any of the statutory remedies in future. 4. Having considered facts and circumstances, I am inclined to show indulgence in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account. Accordingly the respondents are directed to restrain from dispossessing the petitioner from the property and from conducting sale of the same, provided the entire defaulted amounts due after crediting the amount of W.P.(C).27203/10-A -3- Rs.30,000/- paid, is remitted in 2 equal monthly installments, falling due on or before 20.10.2010 and on or before 20.11.2010. 5. If payment of defaulted amount is regularised as directed above, the 1st respondent will permit the petitioner to continue payment of future monthly installments in accordance with the original schedule. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the installments as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to Ext.P4 notice and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings, either before this court or before any other forum. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb