IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 5TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 24845 of 2011(E) -------- -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- GEETHA KUMARI, W/O.THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI USHA MANDIRAM, MADANTHACODE, NELLIMUKKU PO, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI. B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KUNDARA BRANCH KUNDARA PO, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 501. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KUNDARA BRANCH KUNDARA PO, KOLLAM, PIN- 691 501. BY ADV. SRI. R.S. KALKURA, SC, SBT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SCL WP(C).No. 24845 of 2011(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P: THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT.16.03.2011. EXT.P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT.30.04.2011. EXT.P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE IN CMP.5577/2011 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. EXT.P5: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT.26.08.2011 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE SCL S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24845 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner only seeks facility to regularise the loan account by paying the defaulted amounts and to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the bank opposes the same. 3. Having heard both sides, I am of opinion that the respondents can show some more leniency to the petitioner in the matter of regularising the loan account. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioner pays the amounts stipulated by the bank for regularising the loan account within one month, the W.P.(C)No.24845/11 2 respondents shall permit the petitioner to regularise the loan account and to pay off the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. If the petitioner complies with the above directions and continue to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of either the defaulted amounts or any of the future instalments as per the loan agreement, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.24845/11 3 W.P.(C)No.24845/11 4