IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011/16TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 33996 of 2010(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- R.J.JAYASREE, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O. LATE RAMESH CHANDRAN, ERATHU VEEDU, THALAYAL, ATHIYANOOR VILLAGE, BALARAMAPURAM.P.O., PIN-695 501, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.D.ROBINSON, SRI.K.R.KRISHNA KUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF MYSORE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BRANCH, PONNI BUILDING, POWER HOUSE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 032, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF MYSORE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BRANCH, PONNI BUILDING, POWER HOUSE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN-695 032. 3. ANSAR.H., S/O. HASSAN, T.C.43/167 (1), MANACAUD, KAMALESWARAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 032. R1 BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33996 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Petitioner is the guarantor with respect to a loan availed by the 3rd respondent from respondents 1 and 2. Consequent to default committed by the 3rd respondent in repayment, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated and the immovable property belonging to the petitioner, which is the secured asset, was put to sale on publishing Ext.P3 proclamation. 2. According to the petitioner, the guarantee was obtained by misrepresentation of facts and by playing fraud on the petitioner in collusion with respondents 1 and 2. It is further stated that the coercive steps were being pursued without considering the offer made by the petitioner to pay off the liability in a phased manner. 3. Considering the nature of dispute raised and also considering availability of the effective remedy provided under the statute, this court is not justified in interdicting with the proceedings. However, by virtue of an interim order, confirmation of sale if any takes place was directed to be kept in abeyance subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a W.P.(C).33996/10 -2- sum of Rs.3 lakhs. It is reported that the petitioner had paid the amount, eventhough belatedly. 4. Standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 had stoutly refuted the allegations and contended that the petitioner had executed all necessary documents with an intention to create equitable mortgage with respect to the property in question, in order to secure the loan availed by the 3rd respondent. It is further contended that all steps contemplated under the SARFAESI Act was initiated after due compliance of the mandatory procedure. 5. Confronted with the above situation, learned counsel for petitioner made an appeal to this court to permit to pay off the entire liability in a phased manner, within a reasonable time, on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings and that she is also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedies. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances, eventhough I am not inclined to interfere on merits, the limited relief can be considered for permitting payment of the entire amount in instalments, within a reasonable time. 7. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to W.P.(C).33996/10 -3- condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amount outstanding along with interest and expenses if any due, in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 30.4.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb