IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10480 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. M/S.LAKEVIEW AYURVEDIC RESORTS & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT.LTD.,(LARC RESORTS),REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CHANDY MATHEW. 2. CHANDY MATHEW, MANAGING DIRECTOR, LARC PVT. LTD., OTTACKAL PO,THENMALA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.CHANDRA BOSE SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIN LTD.(K.S.I.D.C), REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER & SECRETARY, KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, CO-OPERATIVE TOWERS, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.PATHROSE MATHAI - SC SRI.SAJI VARGHESE ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.10480 of 2010-H ---------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging the steps taken by the respondent particularly the second respondent under the relevant provisions of the SARFAESI Act. When the petitioner turned to be a defaulter, the Bank declared the account as 'NPA' and proceeded with the steps under the above Act, which forms the subject matter of the challenge in tis Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent as well as the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent Bank; who submit that the challenge raised in this Writ Petition is quite wrong and misconceived and further that the petitioner if aggrieved of the steps as aforesaid, has to pursue the statutory remedy, by approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal and not the High Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not intending to avail any such course and the only prayer now pressed before this Court is to permit the petitioner to W.P(C) No.10480 of 2010-H 2 clear the liability within a period of 'six' months. 4. The learned standing counsel for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the second respondent Bank submit that the petitioner may be directed to prove his bonafides by depositing a portion of the liability; so as to avail the benefit of instalments. 5. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to deposit 1/4th of the amount claimed in Ext.P13 within one month and the balance amount shall be satisfied within 'six' months. Subject to this, all further coercive steps being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed in satisfying the due amount as above, it will open to the respondents 1 and 2 to proceed with appropriate steps in accordance with law for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab