IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2011 / 28TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16178 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.S.THOMPSON, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.SANKARAN NADAR, KARTHIKA, PAPPADU, PEROORKADA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2. ICICI BANK LTD., LAND MARK, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA, HAVING ITS BRANCH AT FELICITY SQUARE, OPP:A.G.S.'S OFFICE, NEAR STATUE,M.G.ROAD,695 039 TRIVANDRUM. REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 3. GOPAKUMAR, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, RAILWAY QUARTERS NO.7B, CANTONMENT POST, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 4. ICICI BANK, KOLLAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.PIN-691 001 R1 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN R2 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.V.R.REKESH SRI.K.K.M.SHERIF THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.16178/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 28/9/2010 IN O.S.NO.735 OF 2007. P2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/9/2010 IN O.S.NO.735 OF 2007. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/2/2011 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM IN C.M.P.NO.366 OF 2011. P4 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1/3/2011 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16178 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has sold certain properties to the 3rd respondent, who availed of loan facilities from the 2nd respondent bank mortgaging the said property. The petitioner filed a suit contending that the sale was only a sham transaction. That suit was decreed ex parte. The bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, in respect of the said property. The petitioner is challenging the same. 2. The learned counsel for the bank submits that the decree was an ex parte decree and the bank is taking steps to file an application to set aside the ex parte decree. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to pay off the amounts after availing of one time settlement facility or other concessions offered by respondents 2 and 4. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. This W.P.(C)No.16178/11 2 Court passed an interim order on 23.6.2011. It is submitted that the amount to be paid as a condition for the stay has already been paid. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The petitioner shall file an application before the 4th respondent seeking benefits of One Time Settlement Scheme to pay off the amounts due. The bank shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible. Till orders are passed, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of the One Time Settlement amount as directed by the bank, it would be open to the bank to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.16178/11 3 W.P.(C)No.16178/11 4