IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23064 of 2011(G) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- NANCY MICHAEL, W/O.LATE MICHAEL BERLY, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT 12/1398, PANAYAPALLY, COCHIN-2, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE ICICI HOMES FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, ERNAKULAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, 3RD FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, EMGEE SQUARE, OPP.PADMA THEATER, COCHIN-682 035. 2. THE AHTORISED OFFICER, ICICI BANK LIMITED, T.C.25/2491, 1ST FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, PULIMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PIN-682 002. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI-2. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695001. ADV. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23064 of 2011(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1:- A TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS COCHIN CORPORATION DATED 23/06/10. EXT.P2:- A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.08/04/11 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE APPEARED IN THE MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 21/05/11. EXT.P4:- A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AS AGAINST EXT.P2 AND P3 NOTICES ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5:- A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF EXT.P4 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6:- A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02/08/11 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.23064 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C. Kuriakose, J In this Writ Petition under Article 226, the petitioner who has availed a housing loan from the first respondent seeks police protection from what is described as the threats and attempted illegalities from the first respondent. The stand taken by the Police is that the first respondent/ company is only trying to recover the amounts due to them on account of a housing loan in accordance with the provisions of the Securitisation Act. The same stand was taken by the learned counsel for the first respondent. By an interim order dated 24/08/11, we directed Sri.A.A.Ziyad Rahman, the learned counsel for the first respondent to seek instructions from the first respondent as to the defaulted W. P. C. No.23064 of 2011 -2- amounts and total balance due from the petitioner. Today it is submitted on behalf of Sri.Ziyad Rahman that the defaulted amount itself will come to ` 6 lakhs. He also submitted that if the defaulted amount be paid immediately coercive actions presently initiated for recovery can be held up for a reasonable time provided the account is regularised. We enquired of Sri.T.Madhu as to whether his client will be able to pay the defaulted amount of ` 6 lakhs immediately. The learned counsel's response was at least three months time be required. 2. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, we are of the view that no case is made out for issuance of the police protection directions sought for. The action initiated by the first respondent cannot be branded as an illegal one. At the same time, as we notice that the petitioner is a widow, we feel that maximum possible indulgence should be shown by the first respondent and W. P. C. No.23064 of 2011 -3- direct the first respondent to keep in abeyance all coercive action presently initiated against the petitioner for a period of three months from today on condition that the petitioner will pay to the first respondent within a period of two months from today a sum of ` 3 lakhs. If ` 3 lakhs is paid as above, the 1st respondent should consider a request to be made by the petitioner to the 1st respondent for conferring the benefit of discharging the debt in easy instalments. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN JUDGE kns/-