IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2011 / 20TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37467 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- K.P. MUHAMMED HARIS, PISHARI KAVU, EDAKKAD.P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. SRI.S.ABHILASH SRI. K.SIJU SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD., 1ST FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ICICI BANK, SHAFEER COMPLEX, KANNUR ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673 001. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SMT.K.LEEPA PIOUS FOR SRI.V.R.REKESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37467 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, proceedings was initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and the immovable property, which is the secured asset, was sought to be taken over possession. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps were proceeded against without considering Ext.P2 reply submitted against Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act. 2. Considering the effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner against the impugned proceedings, this court was not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, on the basis of an undertaking made by the petitioner that he will regularise payments of the defaulted amounts within a short period, indulgence was shown in staying further actions for dispossession subject to condition of payment of a sum of Rs.1 lakh. It is stated that the stipulation has already been complied with. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Bank, on W.P.(C).37467/10 -2- the basis of instructions, submitted that, after crediting all payments made, the account is still in default for an amount around Rs.2,15,000/- and that the petitioner was not taking any earnest efforts to make payment of the monthly instalments on a regular basis. 4. Having considered the facts and circumstances I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not proper, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account within a short period on payment of the amounts in default, in instalments. 5. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 notice, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amount in default (defaulted instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of the 3 succeeding months. The petitioner shall also make payment of the regular monthly instalments due for respective months, along with the above said payments. 6. If payment of the defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above, the respondents shall permit the petitioner to W.P.(C).37467/10 -3- continue payment of the future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 7. 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. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb