IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 10285 of 2010(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. P.N.INDIRA, KOTTADAYIL HOUSE, MARADU P.O., NETTOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. K.R.GIREESAN, KOTTADAYIL HOUSE, MARADU P.O., NETTOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.JALEEL SRI.P.H.SHAJI (THRIKKAKARA) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. AIG HOME FINANCE INDIA LTD., 9TH FLOOR, NICKOLAS PIRAMAL TOWERS, PENINSULA PARK G.K.MARG, LOWER PANEL, MUMBAI-400 013, REPRESETNED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER. 2. AIG HOME FINANCE INDIA LTD., 37/3450, 2ND FLOOR, KALYAN TOWER, DESHABHIMANI JUNCTION, KALOOR. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J ----------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10285 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repayment of a housing loan availed from the respondent Bank, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated against immovable property, which is the secured asset. Ext.P1 notice was issued calling upon the petitioner for a conciliation in order to settle the account. According to the petitioner, even though a settlement was arrived with respect to the amount payable by the petitioners, the respondents insisted for payment of the amount in a lump sum. Since the petitioner could not accede to such request the settlement could not be worked out. Subsequently the petitioner had received Ext.P2 notice issued under Rule 8(1) of the security interests (Enforcement) Rules, intimating about steps taken as contemplated under Section 13(4) of the Act. 2. An interim order was issued in this Writ Petition on 26-03-2010 directing to maintain status quo, subject to the condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.2 lakhs, on or before 15-04-2010. Subsequently time for payment was extended till 30-04-2010. Thereafter the Writ Petition was dismissed on 20-9-2010 as not pressed on the basis of a submission that the respondent Bank had agreed to settle the account on payment of a sum of Rs.1,80,000/-. Subsequently a Review Petition was filed and the judgment was recalled since it was contended that the respondent Bank has not accepted payment of the amount as agreed upon. However, through an interim order the petitioner was directed to make payment of the sum of Rs.1,80,000/- for which a Demand Draft was already drawn. It is stated that the amount was paid in accordance with the direction issued on 15-10-2010. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents Bank submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and there is a total arrears outstanding to the tune of more than Rs.7.70 lakhs. Even the defaulted arrears after crediting payments already made will come to Rs.1,16,000/- is the submission. 4. Having confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are ready to regularise the account by paying the defaulted arrears, subject to an undertaking that they are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act and that they are not intending to persue any statutory remedy against the proceedings. 5. Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that, even though interference on merits is not possible, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account by paying the defaulted amounts within a short period, in instalments. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to remit the entire arrears (defaulted instalments along with interest and expenses if any) in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be paid on or before 15-12-2010 and the subsequent payments on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months. The petitioner shall also make payment of the regular instalments due for the month from December, 2010 onwards, along with payments as directed above. 7. If payment of defaulted amount is regularised as directed above, the respondents shall permit the petitioners to pay the future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any of the instalments as stipulated above or any of the future monthly instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to the notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc/