IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2010 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26353 of 2007(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- DILEEP KUMAR, AGED 46 S/O.K.V.VELAYUDAN, KARUVANNURKARAN HOUSE NEDUPUZHA P.O., THRISSUR BY MR.P.JACOB VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADVS.MR.R.SREENIVASAN MR.TOM JOSE (PADINJAREKARA) MR.VARUGHESE M EASO MR.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SMT.PRAISHEEL PRAKASAM SMT.NISHA JOHN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORIUSED OFFICER UNION BANK OF INDIA I FLOOR, UNION BANK BHAVAN M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682035 2. THE MANAGER UNION BANK OF INDIA CHERPU BRANCH, THRISSUR R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.26353/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PASS BOOK OF HOUSING LOAN NO.46253. P2:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 25.7.07 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DTD. 24.8.07 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.26353 of 2007-K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of March, 2010. Judgment The petitioner was given a housing loan by the Union Bank of India. Later, notice was issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. Allegedly, the petitioner did not respond. Steps were taken under Section 13(4) of that Act. Petitioner moved this Court. The bank filed a statement through its counsel pointing out that the then Branch Manager has essentially defrauded the bank and the CBI is investigating the case against him. The bank appears to say that the transaction in hand is also one which the CBI is looking into. But the fact of the matter remains that the petitioner is not an accused as of now. Nor are his co-obligants. Taking note of the relevant facts and factors, this Court had issued an interim order on 13.9.2007 directing that the petitioner will continue to pay the instalments in terms of the agreement with the bank and clear the arrears also, together with interest. If that WPC26353/07 -: 2 :- interim order is being complied with, there is no reason why the bank shall not hold its undertaking that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 will not be initiated as of now. On the facts and circumstances, if the petitioner has cleared the arrears, including interest and continues to pay at the agreed rate, there is no reason why the bank should persuade itself to take further action, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case. In the result, this writ petition is ordered directing that if the petitioner has paid the arrears as also interest and is continuing to pay the instalments in terms of the agreement with the bank, following the interim order dated 13.9.2007, the bank shall not proceed with the impugned action against the petitioner. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/2503