IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 2586 of 2011(W) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MOHAMMED KUTTY, ASARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHANDIROOR P.O., ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.ABOOBACKER(EDAPPALLY) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF MYSORE, ERNAKULAM BRANCH, NARAKATHARA ROAD, SHENOY'S JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM-682035. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF MYSORE, ERNAKULAM BRANCH, NARAKATHARA ROAD, SHENOY'S JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM-682035. R2 BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 2586 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner availed a housing loan from the respondent Bank during the year 2004, to the tune of Rs.7,25,000/-and a vehicle loan during the year 2005, to the tune of Rs.3,45,000/-. The loans were secured through equitable mortgage created on a property having an extent of 24.500 cents. The repayment period of the loans is for 15 years and 7 years respectively and the same has not expired. Consequent to default committed in payment of monthly instalments, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act) was initiated and the property in question was proceeded against. Ext.P3 is the notice issued by the 1st respondent intimating steps taken under section 13(4) of the Act. 2. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps are now being pursued without considering request made for permitting regularisation of the account on the basis of an offer made for payment of the amounts overdue. WP(C).2586/2011 2 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent it is mentioned that the petitioner had committed serious default in repaying both the loans and further he had committed fraud on the respondent Bank by transferring ownership of the property which was offered as security. Ext.R2(a), copy of the encumbrance certificate, produced in this regard will which reveal that sale deed was executed by the petitioner in favour of a third party on 10.1.2011 with respect to the secured assets. Under the above mentioned circumstances regularisation of the loan accounts could not be permitted, is the contention. It is further stated that a total sum of Rs.7,66,443/- is the outstanding balance in both the loan accounts put together. 4. In view of the effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner against Ext.P3, this court was not inclined to interfere with the matter. However as a gesture of indulgence dispossession of the petitioner from the property was stayed subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- . It is submitted that the petitioner had complied with the condition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, being confronted WP(C).2586/2011 3 with the above position, submitted that even if regularisation of the loan account could not be directed, the petitioner may be permitted to pay off the entire liability in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. The above request is made based on an undertaking that the petitioner is not pursuing any statutory remedy and that he is relinquishing all challenges. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not proper, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to pay off the entire liability in instalments, within a reasonable time. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire balance amount along with interest and expenses if any due, in 8 (eight) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before the last day of every succeeding months. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps initiated WP(C).2586/2011 4 pursuant to notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings . C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).2586/2011 5