IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2011 / 13TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21320 of 2011(L) ----------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- M/S.ROSEBUD PROJECTS PRIVATE LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.K.JAWAHAR MAHI, 306-310, MADHAVA, C-4, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA EAST, MUMBAI-400 051. BY ADVS. SRI.P.A.AUGUSTIAN SRI.V.K.SATHYANATHAN SRI.T.R.JAGADEESH RESPONDENT : ----------------------- INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ERNAKULAM BRANCH, OPP.KAVITHA THEATRE, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 035. BY ADVS. SRI. LEO GEORGE SRI. P.B. SURESH KUMAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 21320 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPIES OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.3.2011 ALONG WITH NOTICE INVITING TENDERS FROM THE PUBLIC. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 2008 TO MAY 2011. EXT.P3 : NEWS APPEARED ON 16-7-2011 AND 30-7-2011 IN 'THE HINDU'. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE NOTICE TO THE PETITIONER AND NOTICE INVITING TENDERS FROM PUBLIC DATED 18-07-2011. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE PETITIONER DATED 2-8-2011. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD JULY 2011 TO 3-8-2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 21320 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 4th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 initiated by the respondent for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioner to the respondent. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to pay off the balance amounts in instalments. This is opposed by the counsel for the bank. He points out that in May, 2010, when the same situation arose, the petitioner approached the bank and the bank granted him one time settlement facility and to pay the amounts in instalments also. But the petitioner after paying some amount, again defaulted. Therefore, according to the counsel for the bank, the petitioner is not entitled to any further indulgence in the matter. 2. Having heard both sides I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The petitioner shall pay the balance amounts due in 6 equal monthly instalments starting from 1.9.2011. 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, coercive recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any one instalment, it W.P(C) No. 21320 of 2011 -: 2 :- would be open to the respondents to continue recovery proceedings without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/