IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29280 of 2011(H) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- M.J.KURUVILA, S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 63, MANAYANIKAL HOUSE, MARIKA.P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM-686662. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE KOOTHATTUKULAM BRANCH, KOOTHATTUKULAM.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686662. 2. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE ZONAL OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN-36, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER(ADVANCES) 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA OFFICE , RESERVE BANK OF INDIA BUILDINGS, TRIVANDRUM - 695001. 4. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO FINANCE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI – 110001. BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG. BY ADVS.SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: STU WP(C).No. 29280 of 2011(H) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SECURITISATION ACT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25-3-2008. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE PETITIONER'S BANK ACCOUNT. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR FINANCE. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 15-10-2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE. STU S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 29280 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by respondents 1 and 2 for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. 3. However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions; The petitioner shall pay the balance amounts due in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 1.12.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalments on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge - : 2 :-