IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29311 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JAISON V.THOMAS, S/O.V.S.THOMAS, VARIKKAPLAMOOTTIL HOUSE, CHOTTUPARA P.O., KALLAR, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.LALJI P.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GENERAL MANAGER, IDUKKI DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., IDUKKI. 2. MANAGER, MUNDIYERUMA BRANCH, (CO-OPERATIVE BANK), IDUKKI DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).29311/09 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE R1 DT.30.4.2009 EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF Bank RECEIPT ISSUED BY R1 DT.30.7.09 EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF Bank RECEIPT ISSUED BY R1 DT.17.9.09 EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION AS SICK UNIT NO.F/823/2004 DT.2.6.04 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DIC, IDUKKI. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL OKB //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.29311 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. The deceased father of the petitioner had availed a loan from the respondent Bank during the year 1997, to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/-. Property belonging to him was mortgaged for securing the loan. Father of the petitioner died during the year 2002. Long after that, now the petitioner along with other legal heirs were issued with Ext.P1 notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) raising demand for payment of a huge amount of Rs.10,39,082/-. It is submitted that on receipt of Ext.P1 notice the petitioner had remitted a total amount of Rs.2,25,000/- as evidenced from Ext.P2(a) and P2(b) receipts. It is further submitted that the petitioner was running an industrial unit engaged in processing of coffee, which now remains closed down, and that the petitioner is in stringent financial conditions. Ext.P3 is the certificate produced to show that the industry in question now stands registered as a sick unit. Under the above circumstances the petitioner is challenging further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1. W.P.(C).29311/09-H 2 2. Inspite of service of notice in this writ petition through special messenger, respondents failed to appear. It is noticed that the SARFAESI proceedings are initiated against the property which is owned by the deceased father of the petitioner, who is the borrower in the loan transaction. Therefore I do not find any legal ground to interfere with the proceedings initiated. However, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the loan was of the year 1997 and a major portion of the amount now demanded pertains to interest and penal interest. 3. Considering the fact that the borrower is no more and that considerable repayments were already made to the loan account, the Bank may consider One Time Settlement/compromise settlement of the loan account on providing waiver of interest and penal interest due to the extent possible. The petitioner is also seeking directions against the respondents for considering such requests. It is for the petitioner to make such approach before the Bank and it is for the authorities concerned at the Bank to consider such requests on the basis of existing norms. 4. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the respondent Bank with appropriate representation seeking One Time Settlement/compromise settlement of the loan account. If any W.P.(C).29311/09-H 3 such petition is filed, needless to say that the respondent shall consider the same favourably and take a decision thereof, without any further delay. The petitioner shall be intimated about such decision and reasonable time should be given for payment of the amount so settled, in installments. 5. In order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the Bank and to seek remedies as stated above, further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 notice is directed to be kept in abeyance for a period of six weeks from today. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb