IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 305 of 2011(K) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. M/S.SREEKRISHNA TEXTILES REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER L.KUTTIKRISHNAN, 26/42,BIG BAZAR,PALAKKAD 678 014. 2. L.KUTTIKRISHNAN,MANAGING PARTNER, SREEKRISHNA TEXTILES,S/O. LAKSHMANAN,AGED 55 YEARS, UPPATHU KIZHAKKE VEEDU, SEE RAM STREET, KARNAKI NAGAR, MOOTHANTHARA,PALAKKAD 678 014. 3. L.KUMARAN,(PARTNER,SREEKRISHNA TEXTILES), S/O.LAKSHMANAN,AGED 52 YEARS, UPPATHU KIZHAKKE VEEDU, SEE RAM STREET, KARNAKI NAGAR, MOOTHANTHARA,PALAKKAD 678 014. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. AUTHORIZED OFFICER,THE DHANALAKSHMI BANK, IST FLOOR, NEAR A.R.CAMP OFFICE, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM 682 031. 2. DHANALAKSHMI BANK, BIZ BAZAR, PALAKKAD BRANCH REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER - 682 031. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J., SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.305 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed by the petitioners in repaying a business loan availed from the respondent Bank, steps were taken against the immovable property which is the secured asset. Invoking Section 14(1), the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court was approached and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed by that court to take over possession of the property. 2. According to the petitioners, the coercive steps were initiated without considering the remittances already made and also without considering the request of the petitioners to provide sufficient time to pay off the liability in instalments. Hence the petitioners seek interference of this court. W.P.(C).305/11 -2- 3. Considering the fact that the petitioners have not availed the statutory remedy by challenging the steps initiated under Section 13(4), it is not proper and justified for this court to restrain the proceedings. However, as a gesture of indulgence, dispossession of the petitioners were directed to be kept in abeyance subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a sum of Rs.75,000/-. It is reported that the petitioners had complied with the condition. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that they are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. On the other hand a limited prayer is made to permit payment of the entire balance in a phased manner within a reasonable time. 5. Considering the limited request made, I am of the view that eventhough interference on merits is not possible, the petitioners can be permitted to pay off the entire liability within a short period, in instalments. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the W.P.(C).305/11 -3- petitioners remitting the entire balance outstanding along with interest due, in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments the respondents will be free from proceeding with further steps on the basis of the orders issued by the CJM Court and on such event the petitioners will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb