IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2011 / 10TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 10481 of 2011(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NYJIL KURUMPELIL KAIZ, ALIF MANZIL, VADEKKEVILA P.O, AYATHIL, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR, SMT.P.LISSY JOSE. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER,THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, POLAYATHODU BRANCH, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, FEDERAL BANK LTD. REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWER, M.G. ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM-682 017. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.10481 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is under challenge in this writ petition. Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repaying a housing loan availed from respondents 1 and 2, proceedings was initiated against the immovable property, which is the secured asset. Ext.P2 is the notice issued intimating about the steps taken as contemplated under Section 13(4). 2. According to the petitioner, the loan in question was availed in the year 2007 with a repayment period extending to 15 years and the coercive steps were initiated without acceding to the request made by the petitioner for permitting regularisation. 3. Heard; counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. It is submitted that the repayment period of the loan account is for 10 years, but the petitioner had defaulted payment of consecutive instalments. However, it is submitted that, the W.P.(C).10481/11 -2- balance remaining overdue for payment after crediting a sum of Rs.75,000/- paid pursuant to an interim order issued by this court, will be around Rs.1.50 lakhs. 4. Considering availability of the effective statutory remedy against Ext.P2, it may not be justified on the part of this court to interdict with the steps taken. However, learned counsel for petitioner made an appeal to permit regularisation of the account, on the basis of a specific undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings and that he is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy. 5. Eventhough interference on merits is not warranted, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to regularise the account considering the relinquishment of challenges and also considering that the repayment period has not expired. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant Ext.P2, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amount outstanding as overdue (defaulted instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 3 (three) equal monthly W.P.(C).10481/11 -3- instalments, falling due on or before 15.6.2011 and on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months, along with payment of the regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. 7. If payment of defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above, then the respondents shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated or any future monthly instalments, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb