IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 21631 of 2010(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ANIL RAVINDRAN, S/O. RAVEENDRANATHAN, AGED 46 YRS., SANKARAM CMC-16, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SMT.PREETHA V.K. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN, P.B.NO.307, M.G. ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, CHERTHALA. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, S.C, U.B.I. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= W.P.(C) No. 21631 of of 2010 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a 'housing loan' of Rs.5 lakhs from the respondent Bankon 28-3-2004, agreeing to repay the same by way of 78 equal monthly instalments, creating security interest over the property in question. However, since the petitioner was not at all prompt in effecting the repayment, the respondent Bank declared the account as 'NPA' and proceeded further. However, extending a helping hand, the respondent bank, re-scheduled the loan on 9-3- 2009, whereby the liability was stipulated to be satisfied within a further period of 78 months with an EMI of Rs.8,500/-. Even after re-scheduling the loan account as above, the petitioner did not choose to change his track and continued to be a defaulter. As on 30-6-2010, the outstanding liability is stated as Rs.6,11,167/-. It is in these circumstances, the Bank has proceeded with further steps W.P.(C) No. 21631/2010 2 under the SRFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, on instructions, submits that the 'overdue' amount itself will come nearly Rs.1,03,154. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the default was never wilful, but because of some unforeseen circumstances and every earnest effort is being taken to clear the 'over due' amount, for which some breathing time is sought for. 3. Considering the rival submissions and also the fact that the loan is in the 'housing sector', the petitioner is permitted to clear the entire 'over due' amount by way of 'three' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of August, 2010; to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. This is in addition to the liability of the petitioner to satisfy the regular EMIs as well. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the 'over due' amount as above, or if W.P.(C) No. 21631/2010 3 any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular EMIs it will open to the respondents to proceed with appropriate steps for realization of the entire amount in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. mn.