IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 29TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1783 of 2011(W) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- THRESYA, AYANIMOODU, VILAKUM, PUTHUKULANGARA, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. AIG HOME FINANCE LTD. KRISHNA BUILDINGS, BAKERY JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, AIG HOME FINANCE LTD. KRISHNA BUILDINGS, BAKERY JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 3. THE COLLECTION OFFICER, AIG HOME FINANCE LTD. KRISHNA BUILDINGS, BAKERY JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. R1-3 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.1783 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Coercive steps initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from respondents 1 and 2, is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. It is evident that the respondents have invoked provisions of Section 14(1) and the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, had already appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take over possession of the property, through Ext.P2 order. 2. According to the petitioner, the loan in question was availed in the year 2006 with a repayment period of 180 months and the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to her request to permit regularisation of the account, on the basis of an offer made for payment of the amounts in default within a short period. 3. Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and there is a total outstanding of around Rs.3.40 lakhs. It is further submitted that W.P.(C).1783/11 -2- even the amount overdue will come to more than Rs.48,000/-, after deducting all payments made by the petitioner. Since the petitioner had committed consecutive defaults, the respondent Bank is not favouring in permitting regularisation of the account. 4. Considering availability of effective alternative remedy, it is not justified on the part of this court in interfering with the proceedings in exercise of powers under Article 226. However, learned counsel for petitioner made an appeal to this court to permit regularisation on the basis of specific undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and also relinquishing rights to invoke statutory remedy. Considering the limited prayer I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in allowing such a prayer, especially in view of the fact that the petitioner had relinquished all challenges and the repayment period is not over. 5. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amount overdue for payment (defaulted instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) on or before 31.3.2011, along with regular instalments due for the month of March 2011. If payment as directed above is made within the time stipulated, the respondents shall permit W.P.(C).1783/11 -3- the petitioner to pay future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 6. It is made clear that in case of default in payment of the amount as stipulated above or any of the future monthly instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of the proceedings now initiated before the CJM court or by resorting to other proceedings as contemplated under the SARFAESI Act. 7. It is further made clear that the relief granted above is subject to condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb