IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10388 of 2011(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUMA V., D/O. VARADALEKSHMY, AMAL COTTAGE, CHANGA VELIYANNOOR P.O., VELLANAD, NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK HEAD OFFICE, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, PIN-695023. BY SRI.K.G.RADHAKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.10388 of 2011-W ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repayment of a loan availed from the respondent Bank, coercive steps of recovery was initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The immovable property which is the secured asset was proceeded against. Ext.P1 is the notice issued intimating steps taken under Section 13(4). Ext.P6 notice was also issued intimating proposal for sale of the property in public auction. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps were pursued without acceding to her request for permitting payment of the amounts in a phased manner. 2. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank. It is submitted that a sum of more than Rs.6.23 lakhs is due as on 20.10.2007 and the petitioner has not taken any earnest efforts to make payment of any W.P(C) No.10388 of 2011-W 2 substantial portion. 3. Considering availability of effective remedy provided under the statute, it is not proper and justified on the part of this Court to interdict with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to this Court to permit payment of the entire amount in a phased manner within a short time, on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised and that she is also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedy. 4. Eventhough interference on merits is not warranted, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to wipe off the entire liability in instalments within a reasonable time. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Bank to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire balance outstanding, along with interest and expenses if W.P(C) No.10388 of 2011-W 3 any due, in 5 (five) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 30.4.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. 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 condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab