IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32441 of 2011(E) -------------------------------------- CMP.3128/2011 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. P.C.POULY, AGED 70, W/O.LATE JOSEPH, POONJAKKARAN HOUSE, MELOOR P.O., CHALAKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 311. 2. JOSEPH THANKACHAN, AGED 37, S/O.LATE JOSEPH, POONJAKKARAN HOUSE, CHALAKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 311. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.PAULSON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALUVA BRANCH, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER & CHIEF MANAGER, NODAL REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682011. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALUVA BRANCH, NEAR KSRTC STAND, ALUVA P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101. BY ADV. SRI. A.S.P. KURUP, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SD WPC NO. 32441/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SECURITISATION NOTICE DATED 1.11.2010 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE IST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.2.2011 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE IST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 14.10.2011 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30.11.2011 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER TO THE PETITIONERS IN CMP NO.3128 OF 2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE SD S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 32441 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 6th day of December, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioners do not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioners only seek opportunity to regularise the loan account by paying the defaulted amounts and to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. 3. However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioners pay the amounts stipulated by the bank for regularising the loan account in two equal monthly instalments along with regular instalments payable in accordance with the original loan agreement for December, 2011 and January 2012, the respondents shall permit the petitioners to regularise the loan account and to pay off the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. If the petitioners comply with the above directions and continues to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioners commit default in payment of either the defaulted amounts or any of the future instalments as per the loan agreement, it would be open W.P(C) No. 32441 of 2011 -: 2 :- to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/