IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 5070 of 2009(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.K. RAVI, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. KOCHAYAPPAN, MADAPPATTIL HOUSE, ASTHTAMICHIRA, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO SRI.M.N.MANOJ SRIA.G.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, CHALAKUDY TOWN BUILDING, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR. 2. CHIEF MANAGER (CSE), STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BHARATHA KSHEMAM BUILDING, ST. THOMAS COLLGE ROAD, THRISSUR. *R3 FEMIN ANTO, NELLESSERY HOUSE ASHTAMACHIRA P.O. *IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL R3 VIDE ORDER DTD. 19.2.2009. ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI FOR R1 & 2 SRI.N.P.SAMUEL FOR ADDL.R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 5070 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a housing loan from the first respondent. On account of default in repaying that loan, bank initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. This is an unfortunate case where the petitioner, who had a home loan with interest @ 7.75% and repayment charges spread out for 185 months, could not repay, owing to the need for funds to support his daughter, who required medical aid on account of renal problems as evidenced by the materials on record. Be that as it may, SARFAESI Act proceedings resulted in a sale in favour of the third respondent. The offer of the third respondent has been accepted by the Authorised Officer and third respondent has deposited the initial payment of less than one-third of the consideration. However, the third respondent has magnanimously expressed that she would not stand for taking off the property which is a residential property, having due regard to the promise of the petitioner and that he would be satisfied if the matter is WP(C) 5070/2009 2 settled by the petitioner without delay. The third respondent undertakes to pay the remaining amounts due under the sale within a period of one month from now. This is recorded. In the result, it is ordered that the third respondent would pay the balance consideration to the bank within a period of one month from now and would take the sale if it becomes necessary. If the petitioner makes alternate arrangements for settlement of the transaction, to the satisfaction of the bank and the third respondent within a period of two months from now, the bank will not stand by the sale held by the Authorised officer, but will otherwise settle the transaction. If this arrangement being made in favour of the bank fails, the bank will execute necessary documents in favour of the third respondent on being satisfied that the entire amount due from third respondent has been paid. Writ petition ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/28/3