IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 13296 of 2007(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- HARIJAYALAKSHMI V.K. , W/O. RAMAKRISHNAN, VANIYAMKAVIL HOUSE, SOPANAM, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SMT.K.V.BHADRA KUMARI ADV. SMT.ANILA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, AMALA NAGAR, VILANGAN BRANCH,THRISSUR. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BHARATHASHEMAM BUILDING, ST.THOMAS COLLEGE ROAD, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI SRI.R.V.SATHYAPRIYAN NAIR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 13296 OF 2007 ......................................................................... Dated this the 27th March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the proceedings pursued by the respondent Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in respect of the outstanding liability from the petitioner, pursuant to which possession was taken over under Section 13(4) of the Act, as borne by Ext.P1. 2. When the matter came up for admission before this Court on 13.04.2007, an interim order of stay of further proceedings was granted upto 19.06.2007, on condition that the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- within one month. Subsequently, when the matter came up again for consideration on 18.06.2007, the Bank sought for time to get instruction and the interim order was extended until further orders. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition imposed while granting the interim order on 13.04.2007 was complied with and it was pursuant to this, that the interim order was extended until further orders. W.P.(C) No. 13296 OF 2007 2 4. No counter affidavit is seen filed from the part of the respondent-Bank despite the lapse of about three years. It is also not brought to light whether the petitioner has effected any subsequent payment in respect of the due amounts. In the above circumstances, the only option available to this court is to dispose of the matter directing the petitioner to clear the balance amount, if any, by way of six equal monthly instalments, commencing from April 2009. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 20th of April, 2009 and the remaining instalments shall be paid on or before 20th of every succeeding month. If there occurs any failure on the part of the petitioner in remitting the due amount as above, the benefit granted by this verdict shall stand withdrawn. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk