IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 8592 of 2010(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K. GOPI, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT 'PUTHENTHARAYIL', KANDALLOOR P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.RENJIT GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., REPRESETED BY ITS AREA MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR, "LEELA TOWERS", KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., 2ND FLOOR, "LEELA TOWERS", KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.R.S. KALKURA, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C).No.8592 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondents to redeliver the secured asset forthwith. ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, or direction directing the Respondents to regularise the loan account of the petitioner. iii) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the possession of the secured asset back from the Respondents. iv) Declare that the petitioner is entitled to get waiver of penal interest since the principal amount has been remitted by the petitioner. v) Issue any other Writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, even though many a challenge has been raised with regard to the steps taken by the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act, the petitioner is ready and willing to clear W.P.(C).No.8592 of 2010 2 the outstanding liability by way of OTS, simultaneously adding that, a substantial portion of the liability has already been satisfied. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits on instructions that, the actual outstanding liability will come around Rs.1,99,625/- lakhs; where as the 1st respondent has decided to extend the benefit of OTS on condition that, the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.70,000/- on or before the 31st of March 2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to satisfy the same. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner having expressed his willingness to clear the amount by way of OTS, the petitioner is permitted to deposit the entire amount of Rs.70,000/- on or before the 31st of March 2010 and to have the loan account closed accordingly. On satisfying the said requirement, the respondent shall record the satisfaction and release the title deeds of the petitioner. W.P.(C).No.8592 of 2010 3 The recovery proceedings stated as being pursued against the petitioner, shall be kept in abeyance for the time being, subject to the satisfaction of the requirement as above. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed in satisfying the overdue amount, the respondent bank is at liberty to revoke the benefit of OTS and proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE nl