IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2010 / 6TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 18015 of 2010(B) -------------------------- CMP.3407/2009 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- B.JAYAKUMARI, W/O. R.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, 'ANANTHAGIRI', ARUVIKKARA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- BANK OF INDIA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER/ CHIEF MANAGER. ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FOR R1 SRI.K.M.ANEESH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.18015 of 2010-B ---------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the guarantor of a loan of Rs.7 lakhs availed by the principal borrower, who is not a party to the present Writ Petition. 2. The loan was availed by the borrower, creating security interest over the property belonging to the petitioner and also on the strength of another property offered as security belonging to somebody else. As put forth by the learned counsel for the Bank, the borrower did not effect re-payment on time and in the course of further steps followed by the Bank, it was revealed that the documents produced in connection with the other property was actually fabricated by the principal borrower, forging the signature of the persons concerned, which made the Bank to file appropriate proceedings against the principal borrower, which are stated as pending. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was not aware of the evil motives of the principal W.P(C) No.18015 of 2010-B 2 borrower and it is pursuant to the steps pursued by the Bank for realisation of the outstanding liability, resorting to the remedy under the SARFAESI Act, including by filing a petition under Section 14 of the Act for the assistance of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, resulting in Ext.P5 order, that the petitioner became constrained to approach this Court for immediate interference. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner does not intend to press the challenge as to the correctness and sustainability of the steps taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act and that, the petitioner does not intend to avail the statutory remedy as well, by approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The only relief now pressed before this Court is to permit the petitioner to clear the liability by way of reasonable instalments, to save her property. 5. The learned counsel for the Bank submits on instructions that the total outstanding liability as on date is more than Rs.3.5 lakhs. 6. Considering the persuasive submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to discharge the liability in a phased W.P(C) No.18015 of 2010-B 3 manner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to clear the outstanding amounts by way of 'five' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of August, 2010; to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, all further coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the due amount as above, it will be open to the respondent Bank, to proceed with appropriate steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab