IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2010 / 28TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 19076 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ABDUL RASHEEDS,S/O.AHAMMED KUTTY, 40 YEARS, BUSINESS, FOUZIYA MANZIL, URUVAHCAL, P.O.CHOOVVA, KANNUR-6. 2. RUKKIYABI P.,W/O.AHAMMED KUTTY, 65 YEARS,FOUZIA MANZIL, URVACHAL.PO.CHOVVA, KANNUR-6 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL SRI.ANIL.D.KAITHAKKAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KANNUR MAIN BRANCH, PLATINUM CENTRE, FOR ROAD, KANNUR. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 19076 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act; causing intervention of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery in a petition filed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, whereby an Advocate Commissioner has been appointed, who has served a notice upon the petitioner to take physical possession of the properties forthwith. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits with reference to the materials on record, that the petitioners themselves have admitted that they have already approached the DRT by filing SA 37/2010, wherein Ext.P3 interim order was passed intercepting the coercive steps, subject to the condition that the petitioners deposited a total sum of Rs.2,00,000/- by way of two instalments as specified therein, which admittedly has not been satisfied and this being the position, no interference is warranted in the Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the circumstance under which the petitioners could not satisfy the requirement in Ext.P3 has been explained in the Writ Petition, producing copies of the relevant medical records, as to the treatment undergone by the 2nd 2 WP(C) No. 19076/2010 petitioner, because of the fall and fracture to the right femur and hip joint. The petitioners had to incur huge expenditure in connection with the treatment, under which circumstance, they could not honour the commitment, which was never wilful. It is also stated that the petitioners do not intend to press any of the grounds raised in the Securitisation Application with regard to the steps taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act and that the only relief now pressed before this Court is to enable the petitioner to wipe off the entire liability by way of reasonable instalments and to save the property in question. 4. After considering the submissions made from either side and also taking note of the fact that the petitioners do not intend to challenge the proceedings with regard to the issue involved but for seeking time to clear the entire liability in a phased manner, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to clear the liability as above. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to satisfy the entire outstanding liability by way of 'six' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of this month, to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioners in satisfying the liability as above, the respondent will be 3 WP(C) No. 19076/2010 at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum, by pursuing such exercise from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc