IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009 / 1ST ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 22171 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.JAYAN, JAYAN NIVAS, VENGOOR WEST, KOOVAPADI KARA, ILLAMAPAKAPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. MEERA JAYAN, W/O.K.JAYAN, JAYAN NIVAS, VENGOOR WEST, KOOVAPADI KARA, ILLAMAPAKAPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.CHALY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, KALOOR TOWERS, KALOOR-KADAVANTHARA ROAD, KOCHI-17, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER, BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, KALOOR TOWERS, KALOOR-KADAVANTHARA ROAD, KOCHI-17. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA, EZHIKKARA BRANCH, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, S.C.FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2009,ALONG WITH WP(C).22213 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C).Nos.22171,22213, 22251, 22252, 22319,22383,22393 & 22411 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Common issues are involved in all these 8 writ petitions. The 1st petitioner in WP(C).No:22171/09, Sri:K.Jayan is also petitioner in some of these cases. The issue involved pertains to various loans availed by the petitioners herein from the 1st respondent Bank by creating mortgage on property belonging to the said Sri;K.Jayan. Challenge in these writ petitions are against proceedings initiated by the respondent Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 (SARFAESI Act) against the said secured asset. It is submitted that in all the cases notices under Section 13(2) of the Act has already been issued and steps have been pursued for taking over possession of the assets, and to sell it in public auction. 2. Statement filed on behalf of the respondents in WP(C). No:22171/09 revealed that there are many loan accounts sanctioned from the respondent Bank in favour of the 1st petitioner, either in his name as a borrower or he being a guarantor. Further, similar accounts have also been opened by W.P.(C).22171/09 & connected cases 2 several others who were suspected to be persons who are members of the same group. All these loans were availed for the alleged purpose of business in prawn farming, on the strength of lease agreements produced alleged have been executed by the borrowers with owners of various lands. But on investigation it was revealed that the borrowers have not utilised the advance granted for the said purpose and they have not actually taken any such land for prawn farming. The repayment of installments in all the loan accounts were defaulted. A total amount of approximately Rs.5.25 Crores is due to the Bank in this regard. It is further stated that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had already registered a criminal case and investigation with respect to the conspiracy hatched in granting such loans with connivance of the officials of the Bank, is pending finalisation. 3. Having considered the facts and circumstances as narrated above, I am of the opinion that no interference is possible for any resolution of the disputed aspects involved in these cases. Further it is noticed that, against the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, an effective alternate remedy as provided under that statute is available, if the petitioners are aggrieved. 4. However it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they had already suggested a schedule for W.P.(C).22171/09 & connected cases 3 repayment of the entire amounts outstanding, wherein it is agreed that the amount outstanding shall be paid in 6 equal monthly installments starting from 15.11.2009 onwards and on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months and that the respondent Bank had agreed to such a proposal. Therefore he seeks direction from this court to accept such proposal and to keep in abeyance the further steps. 5. Eventhough no interference is possible as stated above I am of the opinion that indulgence need be shown to permit the petitioners to pay off the entire liability as per the above said offer. Hence the writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondent Bank to keep in abeyance further coercive steps pursuant to the notices issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, if the petitioners make payment of the amounts on appropriate due dates as mentioned above. For facilitating such payment as per the terms stated above, the Bank will furnish a balance statement to the 1st petitioner in W.P.(C).No:22171/09 within two weeks from today. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the installments the respondent Bank will be free to take further steps pursuant to the notices already issued in these cases. It is also made clear that the benefit granted under this Judgment is subject to the condition that the W.P.(C).22171/09 & connected cases 4 petitioners in all these cases are precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings before this court or before any other forum. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb