IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2011 / 17TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37423 of 2010(C) -------------------------- (CMP.9439/2010 of C.J.M.,KOLLAM) .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- SASIDHARAN PILLAI, S/O.SREEDHARAN PILLAI AGED 57 YEARS, ROHINI ERAM, THADICADU P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI. SIJU KAMALASANAN SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWERS, M.G.ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., ANCHAL BRANCH, ANCHAL P.O., KOLLAM - 691 306. 3. G.K.MADHU, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, DWARAKA MADOM, NEAR ANANDAVALLEESWARAM TEMPLE, KOLLAM - 9. R1 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.37423 of 2010-C ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th 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 respondents 1 and 2, proceedings against the immovable property, which is the secured asset, was initiated under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Invoking Section 14(1), the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court was approached and 3rd respondent was appointed as Advocate Commissioner. Ext.P3 is the notice issued by the 3rd respondent requesting the petitioner to handover possession of the property. 2. According to the petitioner the coercive steps were pursued without considering his request to permit regularisation of the account by offering payment of the amounts in default. Hence interference of this Court to restrain the coercive steps is sought for. W.P(C) No.37423 of 2010-C 2 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the loan in question was availed in the year 2005 and the petitioner had committed consecutive defaults in payment of the monthly instalments. It is contended that, the classification of the loan account as 'NPA' and further steps taken under the SARFAESI Act, were perfectly legal and valid. 4. It is noticed that the petitioner has not availed any of the remedies provided under the statute, at any stage of the proceedings, prior to the order issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. Therefore, it is not proper and justified on the part of this Court to interdict with the proceedings, exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioner had pointed out that the repayment period of the loan in question is for 15 years and it is further submitted that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any of the statutory remedies and that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. On the other hand, limited prayer is only W.P(C) No.37423 of 2010-C 3 to permit the petitioner to make payment of the amounts in default within a reasonable time in instalments, and to permit regularisation of the account. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner as above, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not desirable, some indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account, especially in view of the fact that the repayment period of the loan in question is for 15 years. 6. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property, provided the petitioner remits the entire amount in default (defaulted monthly instalment along with interest and expenses if any due) in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of two succeeding months. The petitioner shall also make payment of the regular instalments due for the respective months, along with such W.P(C) No.37423 of 2010-C 4 payments. 7. If payment of defaulted amounts is cleared as per the stipulations contained above, the respondents shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of future monthly instalments in terms of the original schedule of repayment. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of the notices already issued by the 3rd respondent. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab