IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 33074 of 2008(K) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.K.JAMALUDEEN, S/O. KANI RAUTHWER, AGED 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARACKAL HOUSE, PALLIPADU VILLAGE, NANGIARKULANGARA P.O. HARIPAD. BY ADV.MR.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. THE LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., AREA OFFICE CHITTOR TOWERS, BAKERYJUNCTION, UNIVERSITY P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 34 REPRESEENTED BY ITS AREA MANAGER. 2. V.VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, ADVOCATE, ALAPPUZHA. R1 BY ADV. MR.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.33074 of 2008-K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a housing loan in 1999 from the first respondent. Later, the first respondent permitted the loan to be re-scheduled, in the sense, providing the repayment period of 15 years and bringing down the EMI rates. On default in payments, SARFAESI Act was invoked and the petitioner is now to be dispossessed. He has been given an interim order by this Court on the strength of that, he paid Rs.4 lakhs and is in possession. Going by the re-scheduled term of the loan, the petitioner has the repayment period left. Being in the housing sector, I deem it appropriate to treat this as a case where if the petitioner remits Rs.4 lakhs more by remitting Rs.1 lakh on or before 28-2-2009, Rs.2 lakhs on or before 28-3-2009 and Rs.1 lakh before WP(C)33074/2008 -: 2 :- 30-4-2009 and continues to pay at the Equated Monthly Instalment rates from March, 2009, the bank would regularize the transaction. It is so ordered. I am clear in my mind that there is no ground of challenge which is sustainable to the impugned proceedings and therefore, the petitioner is unable to demonstrate any jurisdictional error or legal infirmity in the impugned proceedings. If there is default in remitting any of the instalments as aforesaid, the benefits of this judgment will stand recalled automatically and the writ petition will stand dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/190209