IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 29279 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.K.MENON, 51 YEARS, S/O.S.SANKARANUNNI NAYAR, PONNUMKALAM, THOOTHALA.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR. A.F.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, (SARFAESI ACT), HDFC LIMITED, HDFC HOUSE, P.B.NO.1667, RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-682 015. 2. NATIONAL HOUSING BANK, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORE-5 A, INDIA HABITATE CENTRE, 3RD-5TH FLOOR, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003. 3. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GOVERNOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, MUMBAI-400 001. R1 BY MR. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, STANDING COUNSEL R2 AND R3 M/S.VARGHESE & JACOB MR. VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. MR. P.J.VINOD JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 29279 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 2nd day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT One Mr. Prasad Cheerath had availed a loan of Rs.25 lakhs, in June, 2005, to purchase some property with residential building situated thereon, from his relative Mr. K.K. Menon (who is now before this Court as the power of attorney holder of the original borrower). Based on the funds so procured from the Bank, the property belonging to Mr. K.K. Menon was sold to Mr. Prasad Cherath, who subsequently availed improvement loan of Rs. 5 lakhs as well, in August, 2006, creating security interest over the very same property. The repayment was not all regular, under which circumstances, the account was declared as 'NPA' and the Bank proceeded with the steps under the SARFAESI Act, which in turn is under challenge in this Writ Petition, preferred by Mr. K.K. Menon, in his capacity as the power of attorney holder of Mr. Prasad Cheerath. A copy of the power of attorney is produced as Ext.P1. 2. When the matter came up for consideration on earlier occasions, the petitioner was directed to deposit a total sum of Rs. 10 lakhs, by virtue of the separate interim orders, which is stated as complied with. W.P. (C) No. 29279 of 2009 : 2 : 3. The learned counsel for the Bank submits that, by virtue of the payments effected as above, the entire dues in respect of the subsequent 'improvement loan' of Rs. 5 lakhs stands cleared, besides a major portion of the 'overdue' amount in respect of the first loan and only a small amount will be left as the balance. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the balance 'overdue' amount and that the respondent Bank may be directed to regularize the loan, also assuring that the petitioner will effect the regular EMIs as already scheduled without any fail. 3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Bank submits that, the outstanding liability in respect of the defaulted installments has been correctly given in the statement filed on behalf of the Bank, as Rs.15,97,511/- on 30th May, 2010. it is also stated that, after effecting the apportionment of the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs satisfied by the petitioner, the balance 'overdue' amount in respect of the major loan will be around Rs. 50,000/-. In the said circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner can be given one more chance to the petitioner to have the loan account regularized, once the 'overdue' amount is cleared. 4. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is directed to clear the balance 'overdue' amount within two weeks, on which event, the W.P. (C) No. 29279 of 2009 : 3 : loan account of the petitioner will be regularized. Subject to this, the coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. This will be in addition to the petitioner's liability to effect the regular EMIs without fail. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in effecting payment of the 'overdue' amount as above, or if any two consecutive default in respect of the regular EMIs is made, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in lump sum, by pursuing such coercive steps, from the stage where it stands now.. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd W.P. (C) No. 29279 of 2009 : 4 :