IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1360 of 2011(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MR.GILSY FRANSIS,W/O.FRANCIS KURIAN, M/S.METRO ELECTRICALS,SOUBHAGYA COMPLEX, PALLIKKUNNU (PO),KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE FEDERAL BANK,REP.BY ITS MANAGER, KANNUR SOUTH BAZAR BRANCH,ADITYA TOWERS, CALTEX JUNCTION,KANNUR,PIN 670 001,KANNUR DIST. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER(AUTHORIZED OFFICER) THE FEDERAL BANK,KANNUR,PIN 670 001. ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.1360 of 2011-T ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 notice issued under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is challenged in this writ petition. Consequent to default committed in repaying a business loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, the immovable property, which is the secured asset was proceeded against. 2. According to the petitioner the coercive steps were initiated without considering request made by him to pay off the overdue amounts and to regularise the account in question. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank pointed out that an amount of Rs.3,76,976/- is outstanding as on 30.11.2010, as per Ext.P1. It is noticed that by virtue of an interim order issued by this Court on 20.1.2011 the petitioner had remitted a sum of Rs.1 lakh. 3. Considering the fact that the petitioner had not W.P(C) No.1360 of 2011-T 2 availed the alternative remedy provided under the statute, this Court may not be justified in interdicting with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings and also relinquishing rights if any available to pursue statutory remedy. On the other hand, a limited prayer is made for permitting payment of the entire balance in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. 4. Considering the limited request made, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting payment of the balance amount within a reasonable time, in instalments, eventhough interference on merits is not desirable. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property in question, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire balance outstanding along with future interest and expenses W.P(C) No.1360 of 2011-T 3 if any, in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.3.2011 and on or before the 15th day of succeeding months. 6. 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. It is made clear that the above relief is granted subject to condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the recovery proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab