IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2011 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32950 of 2011(P) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- V.VESU, W/O.LATE GOPALAN ACHARY, PATHIYAPADIKKAL HOUSE, KAIRADY P.O., OLIPPARA, PALAKKAD, PIN-678510. BY ADV. SMT.SABINA JAYAN SMT.MINI.V.A. RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, 239, VIDHAN BHAVAN MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021. 2. THE MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, AYALUR BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678510. BY ADV. SRI. A.S.P. KURUP, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sd/- WPC NO. 32950/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 26/6/2008 TO THE 2ND RESPNDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OBTAINED FROM THE RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 5/12/2011 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RS.ONE LAKH. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 5/12/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE SD S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32950 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceedings initiated by the respondents under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioner to the respondents. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to regularise the loan account and to pay future instalments as per the original loan agreement. The petitioner submits that the petitioner has remitted an amount of Rs.1 lakh on 5.12.2011 and now there is no arrears as such. 2. This is disputed by the learned counsel for the bank. 3. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petiton with the following directions: If the amount of Rs.1 lakh stated to have been paid by the petitioner on 5.12.2011 is sufficient to regularise the loan W.P.(C)No.32950/11 2 account, the respondents shall permit the petitioner to regularise the loan account and to pay off the future instalments on due dates as per the original loan agreement. If the amount paid is not sufficient, the balance amount due for regularisation of the loan account shall be paid by the petitioner within one month. If the petitioner complies with the above directions and continue to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement 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 either the defaulted amounts or any of the future instalments as per the original loan agreement, 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. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.32950/11 3 W.P.(C)No.32950/11 4