IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26010 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. K.K.SUDHEER KUMAR, PROPRIETOR, M/S.WOOD ARTS, LAKSHMI NIVAS, DHARMADAM, PIN - 670106. 2. MRS.SHEENA SUDHEER, DEVISADANAM, KAKKUZHI PALAM ROAD, NEAR KUTTAPPAN COLONY, KARUVASSERY, KOZHIKKODE -10. BY ADV. SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, WEST HILL BRANCH, REPRESENTEDBY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, DR.RAJARAM BUILDING, CHAKKORATHUKULAM, P.O.ERANJIPALAM,KOZHIKKODE - 673006. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE INDIAN VOVERSEAS BANK, WEST HILL BRANCH, DR.RAJARAM BUILDING, CHAKKORATHUKULAM, P.O. ERANJIPALAM, KOZHIKKODE - 673006. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, SC,I.O.BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.26010 of 2010-A ---------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T The impugned proceedings, which is initiated under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), is only at the stage of demand notice issued under Section 13 (2). As per the statute, the petitioners have got an effective remedy to file objections disputing the demand. Further, the statute provides remedy by way of appeal against any coercive steps being pursued. Under such circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition on merits. 2. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay off the entire arrears, if reasonable time is granted for payment in instalments. It is noticed that, as per Ext.P1, the balance outstanding as on 31.5.2010 is Rs.72,42,619/-, along with interest due thereafter. It is further submitted that after Ext.P1 notice, the petitioners have remitted an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- on 20.7.2010. Eventhough, W.P(C) No.26010 of 2010-A 2 learned counsel appearing for the respondents is not favouring the request for instalment facility, stating that the loan account is in chronic default, I am inclined to show indulgence for permitting the petitioners to pay off the liability within a reasonable time in instalments, considering the totality of circumstances. 3. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep all further proceedings initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 in abeyance, subject to the condition of the petitioners remitting the entire balance outstanding along with future interest if any due, in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.9.2010 and on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months. 4. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the instalments the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioners are precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings, either before this Court or before any other forum. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// W.P(C) No.26010 of 2010-A 3