IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 10394 of 2011(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI, KIZHAKKEVEEDU, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SENIOR BRANCH MANAGER, KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KILIKKOLLOOR, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT-691 001. 3. JOINT REGISTRAR, (GENERAL) CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOLLAM-691 001. 4. REGISTARAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC KOLLAM FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10394 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :- P1 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE PASS BOOK P2 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENTS DATED 21.2.2008 P3 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENTS DATED 16.10.2008 P4 :- COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DATED 28.2.2008 P5 :- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR DATED 26.2.2009 P6 :- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSION DATED 19.8.2008 P7 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 25.3.2010 P8 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 31.8.2010 P9 :- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 20.1.2011 P10:- COPY OF THE CIORCULAR OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 23.12.2010 P11:- COPY OF THE NOTICED OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 12.2.2011 P12:- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 20.3.2011 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- ANNEXURE R1(a) :- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DGM DTD. 6.10.2006 //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE ami/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No. 10394 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ext.P12 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), is under challenge in this writ petition. Contention of the petitioner is that, the cash credit facility availed by him from the 2nd respondent Bank, which is in default, is liable to be settled under the provisions of Ext.P10 scheme formulated by the State Government, by permitting waiver of interest/penal interest and other expenses to considerable extent. 2. According to the petitioner, on the basis of Ext.P10, the respondent Bank had directed the petitioner to register his name for consideration in the Adalat proposed to he held by the Bank. Such an intimation was issued as per Ext.P11. It is contented that the petitioner had registered his name, but the respondent Bank had refused to consider 2 W.P.(C).No. 10394 of 2011 such request and further proceeded with coercive steps under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. Hence, the petitioner inter alia seeks direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider closing of the loan account in question by allowing the benefits as contemplated under Ext.P10. 3. In the statement filed by the respondents it is pointed out that, the cash credit facility in question was permitted to be settled earlier, in the year 2006. The petitioner was permitted to remit a sum of Rs.6,15,000/-, in instalments, towards full settlement of the amounts due. But after payment of certain instalments, the petitioner had defaulted further payments. However, the respondents are not disputing the fact that inspite of failure to settle the account by virtue of Annexure R1(a), the petitioner will be eligible for consideration in terms of Ext.P10. Therefore, I am of the view that, the respondents are at an obligation to consider the request of the petitioner for settlement of the account in terms of Ext.P10 scheme 3 W.P.(C).No. 10394 of 2011 formulated by the State Government. It is not evident as to whether any such consideration was done prior to initiation of proceedings under SARFAESI Act. However, the respondents are not in a position to dispute that the petitioner was not intimated about the result of any such consideration. 4. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am of the view that, interest of justice will be served if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the claim made by the petitioner for settlement of the account in terms of Ext.P10, before proceeding with further coercive steps under the SARFAESI Act. 5. Therefore, the writ petition disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider the claim made by the petitioner for permitting benefits under Ext.P10 circular, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. A decision in this regard shall be taken, at the earliest possible and shall be intimated to the petitioner. 4 W.P.(C).No. 10394 of 2011 Needless to say that, further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P12 can be pursued only after taking a decision in the matter as directed above, and intimating the same to the petitioner. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/