IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAIHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 8839 of 2011(D) -------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- A.R.SHARAFUDEEN, S/O.ABDUL REHIM, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT MAJIDA MANZIL, KODIMADA, BALARAMAPURAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, CHALAI BAZAR BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER – 695 001. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002, UNION BANK OF INDIA, CHALAI BAZAR BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. A.S.P. KURUP, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8839 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to failure in repayment of amounts due under a loan account which was availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, before whom proceedings under Section 14(1) was initiated, had appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take over possession of the immovable property, which is the secured assets. 2. According to the petitioner the coercive steps were pursued without acceding to his request to permit payment of the amounts in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2 W.P.(C).No.8839 of 2011 respondent Bank submitted that the period of the loans stands expired and the total outstanding is Rs.2,77,485/- as on 30.6.2010, along with future interest. 4. Considering availability of the alternative remedy under the SARFAESI Act, this Court may not be justified in interdicting with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to permit payment of the entire balance within a reasonable time in a phased manner. Such an appeal is made on the basis of a specific undertaking that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that he is relinquishing all challenges. Even though interference on merits is not warranted, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting payment of the amounts in a phased manner. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) on or before 10.6.2011. The 3 W.P.(C).No.8839 of 2011 petitioner shall make payment of the balance amount along with interest and expenses if any due, in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 30th day of June, 2011 and on or before last day of the two succeeding months. 5. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps, on the basis of the notices already issued and on such event, the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/