IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011/15TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 34401 of 2010 (A) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- PREETHY MATHEW, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O.A.S.MATHEW, APPAKKOTTUMURI HOUSE THURUTHIKATTU P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM RESPONDENT: -------------- THE ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER KORATTIYIL COMPLEX, SASTHRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM P.O.-686001. BY SRI.SAJI.P.JOSEPH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-02-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 34401 of 2010 (A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF DOCUMENT NO.2020/2006 DTD.18.10.2006 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.3.2.2009 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.24.10.2009 EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.7.11.2009 EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSION DTD.12.11.2010 EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.13.11.2010. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT DTD.2.12.2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE ab C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.34401 of 2010-A ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Coercive steps initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) to take over possession of the immovable property, which is the secured asset with respect to a loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, is under challenge in this writ petition. Consequent to default committed in repayment, the respondent Bank took steps under Section 13 (4). Invoking Section 14(1), the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court was approached and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take over possession of the property. Ext.P5 is the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner. 2. According to the petitioner the coercive steps were taken without acceding to the request made for permitting regularisation of the account. Hence she seeks interference of this Court. 3. Heard, standing counsel appearing for respondent W.P(C) No.34401 of 2010-A : 2 : Bank. It is submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and the defaulted payments itself will come to more than Rs.2.30 lakhs, after crediting an amount of Rs.4 lakhs paid subsequent to filing of this writ petition, on the basis of the interim orders issued. 4. Considering the fact that the petitioner had failed in availing the effective alternative remedy, I am of the opinion that interference in this writ petition is not proper. This is especially in view of the directive issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United Bank of India V Sathyawati Tondon & others (2010 (8) SCC 110). 5. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to this Court to permit regularisation on the basis of a specific undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and that she is relinquishing rights to invoke any statutory remedy. Eventhough interference on merits is not proper, I am inclined to consider the limited prayer made. 6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for W.P(C) No.34401 of 2010-A : 3 : dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the amounts in default (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months along with payment of the regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. If payments of the defaulted amounts is regularised as per the stipulations contained above, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of the future monthly instalments in terms of the original schedule. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, or any future monthly instalments, the respondent will be free to proceed with further steps. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab