IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 2967 of 2011(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- LALI SATHYADAS, W/O.K.SHAJI, AGED 45, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, VARANAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.C.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, BRANCH AT MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER - 688 5001. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, STATE BANK OF INDIA, RAJESWARI COMPLEX, PERUNNAI, CHANGANACHERRY - 688 521. BY SRI.R.S.KALKURA - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.2967 of 2011-U ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the guarantor with respect to a loan availed by her husband from the respondent Bank. In this writ petition, proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and consequent steps taken before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court invoking Section 14 (1), are under challenge. The immovable property which is the residential house of the petitioner was proceeded against on the basis of orders issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. It is conceded that the borrower, who is the husband of the petitioner, had approached this Court on an earlier occasion and indulgence was shown in permitting payment of the entire amounts outstanding in a phased manner. But the petitioner's husband had failed to comply with the condition. 2. Considering the above aspects, this Court was not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, dispossession of the petitioner from the residential house was stayed, subject W.P(C) No.2967 of 2011-U 2 to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.2 lakhs. It is reported that the amount has already been paid. 3. In a statement filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 it is mentioned that the loan account is in chronic default and that the proceedings is at its fag end. It is also pointed out that, inspite of indulgence shown by this Court in the writ petition filed by the petitioner's husband, he had remitted only a sum of Rs.40,000/-, which is less than 10% of the outstanding amount. 4. Considering the effective remedy available under the statute and also considering the earlier proceedings instituted before this Court, it may not be justified on the part of this Court in making any interference. However, pointing out the remittance made after filing this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence in permitting payment of the entire balance within a short period. Such a request is made on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges and also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedy. 5. Eventhough interference on merits is not at all justified, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to wipe off the entire liability within a reasonable time in W.P(C) No.2967 of 2011-U 3 instalments. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amounts outstanding along with interest and expenses if any due in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 30.4.2011 and on or before the last day of two succeeding months. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of the orders already issued under Section 14(1). 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