IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21802 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- LOVELY K.JIMMY, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.JIMMY, KATTIKKARAN HOUSE, VADUTHALA P.O., KOCHI-682 023. BY ADV. MR. A.BALAGOPALAN MR. A.RAJAGOPALAN MR. R.RAJESH MR. M.N.MANMADAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CANARA BANK, AYYAPPAN KAVU BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, 42/759, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682018. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, AYYAPPAN KAVU BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, 42/759, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682018. BY STANDING COUNSEL MR. PAILY MATHEW MURICKAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 21802 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 21st day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is before this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank, resorting the remedy under the SARFAESI Act, for realization of the outstanding liability under the loan account. 2. The petitioner availed a loan of Rs. 3 lakhs in the year 2006, creating security interest over the property in question, but the repayments could not be effected on time, under which circumstances the Bank declared the account as 'NPA' and proceeded with further steps. The case of the petitioner is that, eventhough the petitioner has effected various payments as borne by Exts. P1 and P2, besides the deposits vide Exts. P4 and P5, the respondents are proceeding with the steps for realization, wrongly showing the outstanding liability as Rs.3,40,051/-. It is also the case of the petitioner that, the claim for 'OTS' preferred by the petitioner has not been positively considered by the Bank. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, on instructions, submits that, the total outstanding liability as on date is Rs.3,62,905/-. The learned counsel also submits that, no concrete proposal whatsoever was made from the part of the petitioner W.P. (C) No. 21802 of 2010 : 2 : as to the amount intended to be deposited by the petitioner under the 'OTS'. Eventhough the petitioner requested the respondent Bank to accept Rs. 2.5 lakhs towards 'OTS', which subsequently was revised as Rs. 2.75 lakhs and thereafter as Rs. 3.25 lakhs, nothing in writing has been given so far. The learned counsel also submits that, the amounts stated as deposited by the petitioner as per Exts. P4 and P5, are still lying in the name of the petitioner as fixed deposit. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, there is absolutely no objection for the petitioner to have it set off against the liability. The learned standing counsel submits that, if any proper petition is filed by the petitioner, expressing the desire to have the liability settled under 'OTS', the same will be considered. 4. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is to file a proper representation before the Bank for availing the benefit of 'OTS', if any, within one week, on which event, the same shall be caused to be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed within one month thereafter, in accordance with relevant norms. It is made clear that, till the matter is finalized as above, all further coercive proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd