IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34166 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.M. SIDDIQUE, S/O.MUHAMMED, MULANTHIKKALPARAMBU, PONJASSERRY P.O., VENGOLA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ELAMANNUR BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.P.V. SURENDRANATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.34166 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. challenge in this writ petition is against the proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repayment of the loan availed from the 2nd respondent. Pointing out to Ext.P1 notice issued prior to initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amount pertaining to the defaulted installments is very less when compared with the total arrears due in the account. Therefore the petitioner is seeking direction for permitting to regularise the account by paying the amount overdue in the loan account which is beyond the limit sanctioned. 2. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner had availed a cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.10 lakhs during the year 2008. The arrears outstanding as on 31.10.2009 is an amount of Rs.11,29,619/-. Since cash credit facility stood unpaid and W.P.(C).34166/09-M 2 exceeded limits, the Bank has already categorised his accounts as NPA. Therefore it s submitted that regularisation of the accounts may not be possible. It is further contended that the petitioner, in violation of the terms of loan agreement is routing bank transactions of his business activities through other Banks. 3. In view of the rival contentions as stated above I am of the opinion that it is not desirable for this court to interfere with the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act. However, the petitioner seeks permission to reserve his liberty to approach the Bank with a substantial payment seeking regularisation of the accounts. 4. Under such circumstances the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to rights of the petitioner in approaching the respondents seeking regularisation and also without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner in invoking appellate remedies available to him under the statute. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb