IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1003 of 2011() ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- KUNJUMOHAMMAD,S/O.MAMMU, THARUPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,KODUNGALLUR PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SAJU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OP.BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, KURUPPAM ROAD,THRISSUR DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER 68001 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,, HEAD OFFICE THRISSUR 680002. 3. THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OP.BANK LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KODUNGALLUR - 680 664, REP.BY ITS MANAGER. BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.1003 of 2011-A ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was challenged in this writ petition. Consequent to default in repayment of amounts due in the housing loan, the respondents initiated proceedings against the immovable property, which is the secured asset. Ext.P3 is the notice issued intimating steps taken under Section 13(4). 2. Considering the effective alternative remedy available, this Court was not inclined to interfere with the matter. However, dispossession of the petitioner from the property was stayed through an interim order dt.12.1.2011, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.75,000/- on or before 31.1.2011. It is conceded that the petitioner had failed to comply with the condition. 3. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am W.P(C) No.1003 of 2011-A 2 not inclined to entertain this writ petition any further. However, remedy if any available to the petitioner to approach the statutory authority under Section 17(1) is left open. So also it is left open to the petitioner to approach the respondent Bank seeking settlement of payment in the loan account by way of instalments or through one time payment after seeking waiver of amounts to the possible extent. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner as observed above. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab W.P(C) No.1003 of 2011-A 3