IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17141 of 2010(P) -------------------------- CMP.5582/2010 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.MANOHARAN,AGED 38,S/O.SATHYANESAN, RESIDING AT SHAJI BHAVAN,ERUMAKUZHY, KOTTOOR PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,(THE CHIEF MANAGER),UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN,M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.S.P.KURUP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 17141 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a housing loan of Rs.4.5 lakhs from the respondent Bank in the year 2006 which was to be repaid by way of regular EMIs of Rs.4,500/- in 15 years. The petitioner could not effect the repayment on time; which made him a defaulter; under which circumstance, the Bank declared the account as ‘NPA’ and proceeded with steps under the SARFAESI Act, leading to issuance of Exts.P5 and P6 orders by the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram for facilitating delivery of possession. The petitioner is aggrieved of the steps as aforesaid, which hence is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the Bank as well. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lapse occurred was only because of some frustrating pecuniary circumstances. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has been effecting substantial payments at different points of time and that the 'overdue' amount is only about Rs.50,000/-, which is assured to be cleared within two months. 2 WP(C) No. 17141/2010 4. After hearing both the sides and also after going through the materials on record, including statement of accounts furnished from the part of the Bank; this Court finds that the petitioner can be remitted to clear the overdue amount by way of ‘two’ equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of this month and the next one to be effected on or before the 30th of the next month, subject to which the loan account will stand regularized. This will be in addition to the liability of the petitioner to remit the regular EMIs. Subject to the satisfaction of the requirement as above, the coercive steps being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed in respect of the overdue amount, or if any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular EMIs, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in a lump sum, by pursuing such steps from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc