IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2010 / 10TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13158 of 2010(T) -------------------------- CRMP.2135/2010 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. BOBBY A.TITUS, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. M.A.TITUS, BUNGLAVIL HOUSE, ST.JAMES,ROAD,VYTTILA,COCHIN-19 2. BINDU.P.B. AGED 35 YEARS, W/O. BOBBY.A.TITUS, BUNGLAVIL HOUSE, ST.JAMES,ROAD,VYTTILA,COCHIN-19 BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER(AUTHORIZED OFFICER) ICICI BANK, ICICI BANK TOWER, NO.1, COMMISSION ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. ICICI BANK, EMGEE SQUARE, OPP: PADMA JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682035, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 3. ADVOCATE LIMMY, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.KKM.SHERIF SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.V.R.REKESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No.13158 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 1st July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The peittioners had availed a housing loan of Rs.13 lakhs from the respondent Bank creating security interest over the property in question, but repayment was not effected on time , under which circumstance, the account of the petitioners was declared as 'NPA' and the bank proceeded with further steps under the SARFAESI Act . It is the case of the petitioners that the proceedings pursued by the Bank are not correct and are contrary to the terms of the agreement executed which made the petitioner to approach the Civil Court by filing O.S. 832 of 2008. Despite expressing the willingness of the petitioners to clear the overdue amount and to have the loan account regularised, the respondnet Bank did not accept the same, which made the petitioners to approach this Court. The learned Counsel for the Bank submits that right from the beginning, the W.P.(C) No.13158 OF 2010 2 petitioners were chronic defaulters and that the overdue amount itself will constitute nearly Rs. 8 lakhs . 2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 16.04.2010, the coercive steps were intercepted on condition that a sum of Rs. Three lakhs was deposited within one month. The time stipulated in the said interim order was subsequently enlarged as per the order dated 08.06.2010. 3. The learned Counsel submits that the condition imposed by this Court has already been complied with and that in the place of Rs. Three lakhs, the petitioner has already effected a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs. 4. After giving credit to the said amount, the learned Counsel for the Bank submits that the balance in respect of the amount towards defaulted amount itself will constitute nearly Rs.4.9 lakhs. The learned Counsel also submits that in view of chronic default , the loan account is not liable to the regulaised. 5. Considering the persuasive submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the loan facility extended by the Bank is a housing loan and one more W.P.(C) No.13158 OF 2010 3 opportunity may be given to clear the 'overdue' amount, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioners to clear the overdue amount in a phased manner. Accordingly, the petitioners are permitted to clear the 'overdue' amount as above by way of 'three' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30.07.2010 to be followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the loan account will stand regularised and all coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that the petitioners shall continue to effect the regular E.M.Is as originally stipulated, besides clearing the arrears as above. It is further made clear that, if the petitioners commit any default in remitting the overdue amounts/arrears as above or in the event of committing two consecutive defaults in respect of the regular E.M.Is payable, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire outstanding liability in a lump sum, pursuing the coercive steps, from the stage where it stands now. No opinion is expressed with regard to the W.P.(C) No.13158 OF 2010 4 relative merits and de-merits, in respect of the terms and conditions of the housing loan and the rights and liberties arising therefrom. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk