IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10676 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- N.KARUNAKARAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.NARAYAN, PROPRIETOR, DARSAN EXPORTS, RESIDING AT TC 19/2080(2), VANIYATHU LANE, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.NISHIN GEORGE VIJAYABABU RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTER, LHO ANNEXE (WING-1), IST FLOOR, CHILD WELFARE COMPLEX, LMS COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-685 033. BY SRI. P.V.SURENDRANATH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. --------------------------- W.P(C). No. 10676 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is before this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act, for realisation of the amount stated as due from him. The petitioner has also sought to avail the benefit of 'One Time Settlement Scheme', if any. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 29.3.2010, coercive steps were intercepted on condition that the petitioner remitted a sum of Rs. 1 lakh, which is stated as complied with. The learned counsel for the Bank submits that the outstanding liability is about Rs.7.22 lakhs, which however is sought to be rebutted from the part of the petitioner stating that the petitioner has effected payment of nearly Rs.2 lakhs and that the balance will only be around Rs.6 lakhs. This Court does not propose to go into the actual facts and figures. Taking note of the persuasive submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the default was not wilful, but because of some unforeseen circumstances, when the petitioner had to incur huge expenditure in the course of the treatment of his wife, who is stated as suffering from cancer, as averred in para 7 of the writ petition, this Court finds that some indulgence needs to be given to the petitioner, so as to enable him to clear the entire outstanding liability in a phased manner. 3. After hearing both the sides, this Court directs the petitioner W.P.(C).No.10676/2010 2 to satisfy the entire liability by way of 'six' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 10th May, 2010; to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 10th of the succeeding months. Subject to the above, all further coercive proceedings pending against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the due amount as above, it will be open to the Bank to proceed with appropriate steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. It is further made clear that this will not stand in the way of the petitioner to approach the Bank by filing a representation for availing same or other concession or allowances, on which event, the same shall be considered by the Bank and appropriate orders shall be passed thereon, giving such concessions to the permissible extent. The last instalment to be satisfied by the petitioner will depend upon the outcome of the decision so to be taken by the Bank as aforesaid. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE ) vps W.P.(C).No.10676/2010 3 W.P.(C).No.10676/2010 4