IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2011 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 35203 of 2009(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. P.V.RAVEENDRAN, PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, PALIYANMOOLA, P.O.ALAVIL, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. PUTHIYAPURAYIL SADANANDAN, CHIRUTHERI KUNNUMBRAM HOUSE, PILANHI P.O., MUNDALOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KANNUR BRANCH, R.M.APARTMENTS, SOUTH BAZAR, TALAP, KANNUR-670 002. 2. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, KANNUR BRANCH, R.M.APARTMENTS, SOUTH BAZAR, TALAP, KANNUR 670002, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.35203/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11/8/2004. P2 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT FOR THE AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/- PAID BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS, DATED 2/1/2009. P3 COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE UNDER THE SARFAESI ACT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS, DATED 26/3/2009. P4 COPY OF THE INTIMATION OF TAKING OVER OF TAKING OVER OF POSSESSION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS, DATED 25/4/2009. P5 COPY OF THE BANKERS CHEQUE OF SBI FOR RS.15,000/- PAID TO THE RESPONDENTS, DATED 21/5/2009. P6 COPY OF THE BANKERS CHEQUE OFSBI FOR RS.5,000/- PAIDTO THE RESPONDENTS,DATED 22/7/2009. P7 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT OF FEDERAL BANK FOR RS.10,000/- PAID TO THE RESPONDENTS DATED 13/8/2009. P8 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THE PETITIONERS INTIMATING SALE OF 2ND PETITIONER'S PROPERTY DATED 10/11/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.35203 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are the borrower and guarantor with respect to loan availed from the respondent Bank. The loan in question was availed in the year 2004, to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/-, by mortgaging immovable property belonging to the 2nd petitioner. Consequent to default committed 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 was proceeded against through steps as contemplated under Section 13(4), as evident from Ext.P3. 2. Contention of the petitioners is that, the coercive steps were pursued without taking into consideration of various payments effected and also without acceding to the request made for permitting payment of the amounts due in instalments. 2 W.P.(C).No.35203 of 2009 3. Considering the effective alternative remedy provided under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, this Court may not be justified in entertaining this writ petition. However, on the basis of the submission that the property mortgaged is the residential house of the 2nd petitioner, indulgence was shown in restraining sale of the property as proposed under Ext.P8, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Subsequently, the interim order was extended on 28.1.2011 imposing condition for remittance of a further sum of Rs.50,000/- within two weeks thereof. Even though the said order was issued during the month of January 2011, there is no proof forthcoming regarding compliance of the condition stipulated. 4. According to the learned counsel for the respondent Bank, the petitioner had failed to remit the amounts as stipulated. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to assert compliance of the condition and according to him there is no instructions received from the petitioner. 3 W.P.(C).No.35203 of 2009 5. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition any further. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 6. However, rights if any available to the petitioner to invoke statutory remedy as well as liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondents seeking payment in instalments or seeking 'one time settlement' is hereby reserved. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/