IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10068 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BALAKRISHNAN.V.N., S/O.OTHENAN, `AKSHATHAM', NIDUVOTTOMKUNNU, MATTANNUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA SMT.D.S.THUSHARA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK N.M.G.B.TOWERS, PALLIKUNNU KANNUR, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. THES BRANCH MANAGER, NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. SC SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No.10068 OF 2010 ------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging the steps taken by the respondent bank invoking the measures under the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act for realisation of the amount due from him under a loan transaction. Many ground has been raised in the writ petition stating that the steps taken by the Bank are not in conformity with the statutory requirements. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of notice under Section 13 (2), no further notice was issued and in the meanwhile, pursuant to the order passed in the application filed by the Bank under Section 14, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he took the possession of the property and handedover the same to the respondent bank. The learned counsel for the bank submits on instructions that, as on date, a sum of nearly Rs.10.95 lakhs is due from the petitioner. WPC NO. 10068/2010 -2- 3. Since the factual position stands conceded to the extent that the possession of the building is already taken over and since the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was a running hotel and much adverse circumstances are being caused simultaneously adding that the petitioner is ready and willing to satisfy the entire liability provided some breathing time is given, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to the respondent Bank forthwith, on which event, the possession of the building and premises shall be returned to the petitioner. On satisfaction of the said amount, the respondent Bank shall provide a statement of accounts also giving credit to the amount already paid by the petitioner. The balance amount as per the said statement of accounts shall be satisfied by the petitioner by way of four equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30/4/2010 and the remaining instalments shall be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. 4. The submission made from the part of the petitioner that the petitioner does not intend to press any of the challenges raised with regard to the steps taken by the Bank by availing WPC NO. 10068/2010 -3- the statutory remedy by approaching the DRT is recorded. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE dpk