IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5434 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ISSAC IDICULA PLAMTHOTTATHIL, AGED 49 YEARS, PLAMTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KOOTHRAPPALLY.P.O, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S SMT.REXY ELIZABETH THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWERS, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-31. ADV. SRI.A.ANTONY FOR R1 SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 5434 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submits on instructions that a total sum of Rs.31 lakhs is outstanding as dues from the petitioner under the loan transaction. In fact, the petitioner had availed a 'housing loan' of Rs.25 lakhs from the respondent Bank after creating security interest over the property in question. But the petitioner was never eager to satisfy the timely instalments right from the beginning, which made him a defaulter; under which circumstance, the Bank declared the account as NPA and proceeded with further steps and this being the position, the steps taken by the Bank are perfectly within the four walls of law, submits the learned counsel for the Bank. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the entire 'overdue' amount, which according to the Bank will come around Rs.4.82 lakhs. It is contended by the Bank that unless and until the entire overdue amount is satisfied on or before the 31st of March, 2010, the prayer for regularization of loan is not WP(C) No.5434/2010 2 liable to be considered. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to clear the entire 'overdue' amount on or before the 31st of March 2010. Subject to satisfaction of the said liability, the loan account of the petitioner shall stand regularized and this will be in addition to the liability of the petitioner to clear the regular EMIs as well. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the overdue amount as above or if any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular EMIs, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump. Subject to this all coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance, for the time being. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc