IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32720 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. A.M.SHAJAHAN, S/O.ABDULLA, NAMBICODE, ELAPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD. 2. HAYARUNNISA, W/O.SAHAJAHAN, NAMBICODE, ELAPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, ELEPPULLY.P.O., PALAKKAD – 678 622. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK, ELEPPULLY P.O., PALAKKAD – 678 622. STANDING COUNSEL SMT.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.32720 of 2010-L ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T Dispute raised in this writ petition is against proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed in repayment of amounts due in an 'overdraft facility' availed by the petitioners from the respondent Bank, proceedings against the immovable property, which is the secured assets, was initiated. On issuance of notice under Section 13(2), the petitioners have objected the proceedings contending that the property in question is described as 'nilam' and 'purayidam'. According to the petitioners, the description qualifies that the property is agricultural land and therefore the same is exempted from the provisions of the SARFAESI Act as per Section 31 (1). The claim of the petitioners was considered and the authorised officer has issued Ext.P4 reply stating that W.P(C) No.32720 of 2010-L 2 merely because of the description of the property, it could not be considered as agricultural land, and the petitioners were with further coercive steps under the SARFAESI Act. Hence this writ petition is filed. 2. The provisions contained in the statute provides effective remedy to the petitioners, if the Bank proceed with further coercive steps. It is also noticed that the question whether the property is an agricultural land or not, could not be decided in this writ petition, since it involves dispute relating to the factual position. Under the above circumstances, this writ petition could not be entertained on merits of the contentions. 3. Having confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any challenge against the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act and that they are not invoking any statutory remedy available. On the other hand, the limited prayer is only to permit to pay off the entire liability in a phased manner, W.P(C) No.32720 of 2010-L 3 within the reasonable time. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent on the basis of instructions submitted that, the total amount outstanding is around Rs.2.25 lakhs. According to counsel for the petitioners, various payments effected in between need be given credit. However, if the petitioners are disputing correctness of amount under demand, it is for them to approach the respondents seeking clarifications. Needless to say that if any such approach is made, the respondents shall furnish proper statement of accounts to the petitioners. But I am of the view that considering the limited request the petitioners can be permitted to wipe off the liability within a reasonable time, in instalments. 5. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4, subject to the condition of the petitioners remitting the entire amount outstanding, along with future interest if any due, in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before W.P(C) No.32720 of 2010-L 4 30.11.2010 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of the notices already issued. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioners are precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab