IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 17325 of 2011(M) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SUNIL KUMAR K.G., AGED 45, S/O.K.M. GOPALAN, KARANAMKOTE HOUSE, THOZHIYUR P.O., PIN-680 520, KUNNAMKULAM (VIA), THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO, SRI.JIJO THOMAS. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 506. 2. THE SENIOR MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, KUNNAMKULAM BRANCH, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 503. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.S. JAMAL. R2 BY ADV.MR.R.S. KALKURA, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/12/2011, ALONG WITH OP (DRT) NO.4002 OF 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 17325 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE SA. NO.577/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE DRT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/09/2010 IN I.A. NO.2507/2010 IN SA. NO.577 OF 2010 OF DRT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE COUNTER FOIL DATED 01/10/2010 SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF Rs.1,50,000/- TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC. 34 OF THE RR ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC.34 OF THE RR ACT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.SIRI JAGAN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(DRT)NO. 4002 OF 2011 & W.P.(C)NO. 17325 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of December 2011 --------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The petitioner in both the cases is the same. The Syndicate Bank to whom the petitioner owed money by way of repayment of loan amounts, initiated proceedings under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 for recovery of the loan amounts. Against the proceedings, the petitioner filed S.A. 577 of 2010 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Originally, the DRT granted stay of proceedings. While that stay was in force, the bank initiated proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act, which is under challenge in W.P.C.No.17325 of 2011. In that writ petition, this Court granted a stay of revenue recovery proceedings. While so, in S.A 577 of 2010, the Debt Recovery Tribunal passed Ext.P1 final order in OP(DRT) No.4002 of 2011, wherein, the petitioner was directed to pay amounts as follows: “a. That a sum of Rs.4 lakhs shall be remitted on or before 30.11.2011; and b. That a further sum of Rs.4 lakhs shall be remitted on or before 30/12/2011; and 2 c. That another sum of Rs.4 lakhs together with the balance amount, if any (including interest, costs, expenses etc.) shall be remitted on or before 31/01/2012. d. That till then (31/01/2012) the defendant bank shall hold up further action under the impugned proceedings, subject to the compliance of the aforesaid conditions.” It is challenging that order, the petitioner has filed O.P.(DRT) No.4002 of 2011. 2. The petitioner does not now dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. Counsel for the bank has handed over a copy of statement of accounts to the petitioner today. The petitioner now seeks facility to pay off the amounts in instalments. This is opposed by the counsel for the bank. 3. However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of these two cases with the following directions: Ext.P1 order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal in S.A.No.577 of 2010 would stand modified as hereunder. The bank shall permit the petitioner to pay off the balance amounts due in six equal monthly instalments starting from 02/01/2012. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalment amounts on due dates without default, further proceedings both under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of 3 Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act and the Revenue Recovery Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any one instalment, it would be open to the bank to take appropriate proceedings for recovery of entire amounts in a lump sum either by continuing the proceedings under the Securitisation Act or under the Revenue Recovery Act or under both. The petitioner also agrees that in view of the above directions, petitioner does not wish to continue any proceedings before any authority in respect of these subject matter and he withdraws all his contentions against the proceedings initiated by the bank, which is recorded. . S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE STU 4 5