IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6600 of 2011(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. V.MUHAMMED BASHEER, S/O. ABOOBACKER, EDASSERY HOUSE, VELLOOR, POOKOTTUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. C.MARIYUMMA, W/O.ABOOBACKER MUSLIAR, EDASSERY HOUSE, VELLOOR, POOKOTTUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR SMT.M.T.SHEEBA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (P&D) MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MALAPPURAM - 676505. 2. THE MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, MALAPPURAM PIN - 676505. BY SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.6600 of 2011-Y ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed by the petitioners in repayment of a loan availed from the respondents, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. Ext.P2 is the notice issued under Rule 8(1)of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002, intimating steps taken as contemplated under Section 13(4). Contention of the petitioners is that the coercive steps are now being pursued without considering their request for one time settlement as well as the request for waiver of interest/penal interest and other expenses to the possible extent. 2. Considering availability of the effective alternative remedy provided under Section 17(1), this Court may not be justified in interdicting with the proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank on the basis of instructions W.P(C) No.6600 of 2011-Y 2 submitted that total amounts outstanding is more than Rs.7 lakhs. It is submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and the petitioners are not vigilant in making payment of the instalments due. 3. Confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for the petitioners made a submission that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that they are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. On the other hand, a limited prayer is made to permit payment of amounts due in a phased manner, within a reasonable time, subject to liberty reserved to approach the Bank for one time settlement. Eventhough interference on merits is not justified, I am of the view that the limited relief sought for can be permitted. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting the entire balance outstanding along with interest and expenses if any due in 10 (ten) equal monthly W.P(C) No.6600 of 2011-Y 3 instalments, falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. 5. It is made clear that the petitioners will be at liberty to approach the respondents seeking waiver of interest/penal interest and expenses to the possible extent, offering one time settlement. It is further made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the respondent Bank considering such request favourably. 6. It is further 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 and on such event the petitioners will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab