IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1875 of 2011(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.N.SHAKIHA, W/O.ABDUL KAREEM, RAMLA MANZIL, PULLIYAMPARAM P.O., PERINGATHUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL MANAGER (AUTHORIZED OFFICER), KERALA STATE CO-OP.BANK LTD., KOZHIKODE, REGIONAL OFFICE, COLAMBO COMPLEX, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. 2. KERALA STATE CO-OP.BANK LTD., KANNUR BRANCH - 670 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R1-2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.1875 of 2011-H ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) against the immovable property, which is the secured asset with respect to loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, is under challenge in this writ petition. After taking possession of the immovable property, the Bank had now proclaimed sale of the property through Ext.P4 notice. Contention of the petitioner is that repayment period of the loan which was availed in the year 2006 is 120 months and the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to the request made by the petitioner to permit regularisation. 2. Standing counsel appearing for the respondent, on the basis of instructions, submitted that the account in question is in chronic default and the amount pending W.P(C) No.1875 of 2011-H 2 overdue for payment itself will come to more than Rs.3.10 lakhs. 3. Noticing that the petitioner has not availed remedy provided under Section 17(1), which is alternative and effective, this Court is not justified in interfering. However, learned counsel made a submission that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges and also relinquishing his rights to invoke the statutory remedy. On the other hand a limited prayer is made to permit regularisation. Considering the fact that the petitioner has got a lengthy period for repayment, I am of the view that if the petitioner makes payment of the amounts in default, he can be permitted to continue payment of future instalments in accordance with the original schedule. 4. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Bank to keep in abeyance all further proceedings for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the amount in default (defaulted monthly W.P(C) No.1875 of 2011-H 3 instalments along with interest and expenses if any due), in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. The petitioner shall make payment of the regular monthly instalments due for the respective months along with the above said payment. 5. If payments of defaulted amounts is regularised as per the stipulations contained above, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of the future instalments in terms of the original schedule of repayment. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments the respondent will be free to proceed with further steps. 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. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab //True Copy//