IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011/5TH PHALGHUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5277 of 2011 (H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- SATHEESH BALLAL,49 YEARS, S/O.SUBARAYYA BALLAL,ADUKKA,MULLERIA KARADKA VILLAGE,KASARAGOD DISTRICT,PIN-671543. BY ADV. SRI.A.F.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1 STATE BANK OF INDIA,REP.BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,(SARFAESI ACT),KASARAGOD BRANCH BANK ROAD,KASARAGOD-671121. BY ADV. SRI.V. RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-02-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 5277/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12/10/2010 INTER ALIA STATING THAT THE ARREARS IN THE LOAN ACCOUNT IS RS.98,190 AS ON 12/10/2010. P2: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 19/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK UNDER 13 (2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT, 2002. P3: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE MASTER CIRCULAR ON PRUDENTIAL NORMS ON ASSET CLASSIFICATION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5277 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repaying a housing loan availed from the respondent bank, proceedings under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. It is submitted that the respondent has taken over the possession of the property invoking section 13(4) of the Act, symbolically. It is contended that the loan in question was availed in the year 2004 with a repayment period of 15 years, and the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to request of the petitioner to permit regularisation of the account based on the offer made to pay the amounts in default, within a short period. 2. Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, on the basis of the instructions, submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and even the amount overdue for payment 2 W.P.(C)No.5277 of 2011 will come to more than ` 75,000/-. 3. Considering the fact that the petitioner has not chosen to avail the statutory remedy provided under section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, it may not be proper for this Court to interfere with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges and all the rights if any available, to invoke statutory remedy. On the basis of such an undertaking, a limited prayer is made to permit regularisation of the account by offering payment of the amounts in default, within a short period. 4. Considering the limited request I am of the view that, even though interference on merits is not justified, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account, especially in view of the fact that the repayment period of the loan is for a period of 15 years and also in view of the fact that the petitioner had relinquished all challenges. 3 W.P.(C)No.5277 of 2011 5. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the amounts remaining overdue for payment (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 2 (two) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.3.2011 and on or before 15.4.2011, alongwith payment of regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. 6. If payment of the amounts in default is regularised as directed above, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of future monthly instalments in accordance with original schedule of repayment. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the amounts as stipulated above, or any one of the future monthly instalments, the respondent will be free to proceed with further coercive steps on the basis of the notices already issued and on such event the 4 W.P.(C)No.5277 of 2011 petitioner will be precluded from resorting to any subsequent challenge. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/ //True copy// P.A.to Judge