IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15502 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ V.HARIDAS, S/O.ICHARA VAREER AGED 50 YEARS, 'LAXMI', KALOOR ROAD, KOCHI-17. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL SRIT.A.SHAIN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK (HOUSING FINANCE), M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK REGIONAL OFFICE, PIONEER TOWERS SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM 682 031 3. AUTHORISED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK REGIONAL OFFICE, PIONEER TOWERS, ERNAKULAM-682 031 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 15502 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a defaulter in payment of loan amount due from him to the respondent bank. Respondents have initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, for coercive recovery, which is under challenge in this writ petition. He would submit that he has now paid Rs.8,40,000/- and only about one lakh rupees is due as balance. The petitioner submits that the respondents have taken possession of the security interest, which is the dwelling house of the petitioner and his family have been thrown to the street. Now the petitioner undertakes to pay the balance amount in two instalments and prays that possession may be returned to the petitioner subject to that condition. 2. This is opposed by the standing counsel for the respondents. He would submit that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court and despite obtaining an order, he did not w.p.c.15502/08 2 comply with the conditions in that order. Therefore, according to him, the petitioner is not entitled to any more indulgence in the matter. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. Now that the petitioner has already paid more than 80 per cent of the amounts due, I feel that a lenient attitude can be taken in the matter to enable the petitioner to pay off the balance amount in instalments on conditions. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner shall pay the balance amount (which according to the respondents is Rs.1,60,000/-) in two monthly instalments on 1.7.2008 and 2.8.2008. The petitioner shall be put back in possession of the security interest within one week from today. The undertaking that if he commits default in payment of either of the two instalments on the due dates, he will voluntarily surrender the security interest to the respondents, is recorded. If the petitioner pays the instalments in time, coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments or refuses to surrender possession on default, it w.p.c.15502/08 3 would be open to the respondents to continue the proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard, or to initiate contempt proceedings for violation of the undertaking. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge