IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 34251 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.A.JOSEPH,AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.ANTHAPPAN,KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,POLLATHAI.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ALLEPPEY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.A67,CULLEN ROAD,ALAPPUZHA POST,ALAPPUZHA- 688 001.REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,THE ALLEPPEY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.A67,CULLEN ROAD, ALAPPUZHA POST,ALAPPUZHA-688 001. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.34251 of 2010-F ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed in repayment of a 'business mortgage loan' availed from the respondent Bank, steps were initiated against the immovable property which is the secured assets. Ext.P2 is the notice of demand issued under Section 13(2). It is stated that, the respondents are threatening the petitioner with forceful eviction, without issuing any further notice. According to the petitioner, considerable payments were effected even after receipt of Ext.P2 notice. But the coercive steps were pursued without acceding to the request of the petitioner for permitting payment of the amount in a phased manner. 2. Eventhough the notice issued by this Court was W.P(C) No.34251 of 2010-F 2 served on the respondents as early as in December 2010, nobody enters appearance on behalf of the respondent, inspite of several adjournments. At the time of admission an interim stay was granted by this Court restraining the respondents from taking further steps for dispossession of the petitioner, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.40,000/- . It is reported that the stipulation has already been complied with. Eventhough, the petitioner had not submitted any objections against Ext.P2 nor had he invoked any remedy as provided under Section 17(1), I am inclined to show indulgence in the matter on the basis of submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. The limited prayer of the petitioner is to permit payment of the balance amount in instalments, within a reasonable time. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further W.P(C) No.34251 of 2010-F 3 coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property in question, provided the petitioner remits the entire outstanding balance in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. 4. It is made clear that, on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of Ext.P2 notice. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab