IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27848 of 2011(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- RAMADEVI M.R., W/O.GOPALAN NAIR, MULLAYIL KOTHATTU, AROOR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 534. BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED SRI.V.PRASANTH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK, 1ST FLOOR, PIONEER TOWERS, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, SHANMUGHAM ROAD BRANCH, ERNAKULAM-682 031. BY R.S. KALKURA, S.C. FOR R1 AND R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DS WP(C).No. 27848 of 2011(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29/7/2011 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 3/10/2011 FOR ONE TIME SETTLEMENT BENEFIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE DS S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 27848 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. He points out that the petitioner has not mentioned that he had another loan in respect of which also, the same property has been given as security. The respondents have initiated proceedings under the Act in respect of that loan also and the petitioner is likely to construe any orders in this writ petition as orders in respect of the proceedings pursuant to the other loan also, is his contention. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: I direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the amounts due in respect of the loan, which is the subject matter of this writ petition, in ten equal monthly instalments starting from w.p.c.27848/2011 - : 2 :- 1.12.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalments on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act in respect of the loan, which is the subject matter of this writ petition, shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. I make it abundantly clear that the stay granted in this writ petition shall not affect any proceedings against the same property, which the respondents have initiated for recovery of the other loan, for which, the same property has been given as security and the respondents can continue proceedings initiated for recovery of that loan against the same property, unless the petitioner obtains orders in respect of the said loan from a competent authority. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge