IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2011 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 15152 of 2011(T) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- MRS.JESSY XAVIER, AGED 50, W/O.K.O.XAVIER, 6/175, KALARICKAL HOUSE, JEW TOWN, KOCHI - 2 BY ADV. SRI.S.SACHITHANANDA PAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHANMUGHOM ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 005. 2. SYNDICATE BANK, THOPPUMPADY BRANCH, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI - 682 005 BY ADV. SRI.M.S.KALKURA, SC., SYNDICATE BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 15152/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPIES OF THE COUNTER FOILS DATED 31/01/2011, 29/03/2011 AND 30/05/2011. P2: COPY OF THE TREATMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY SATHYA SAI INSTITUTE OF HIGHER MEDICAL SCIENCES. P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.15152 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of June, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repaying a housing loan availed from the respondent Bank, proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated and the immovable property, which is a secured asset, was proceeded against on issuing Ext.P3 notice as contemplated under Rule 8(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules. 2. According to the petitioner, the default in regular payment of monthly instalments happened only because of his unexpected illness. It is stated that the petitioner is working as a sweeper and her husband is only a daily labourer. Due to the present financial stringency, she is finding it difficult to pay off the monthly instalments defaulted, in a lump sum. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to 2 W.P.(C).No.15152 of 2011 the request made by the petitioner for permitting regularisation, by making payment of the amounts in default in a phased manner. Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this Court. 3. Heard ; learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank. It is submitted that the loan amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was availed in the year 2008 and the petitioner had effected payment of only 19 monthly instalments. The original period stipulated for repayment of the loan is 7 years and there is consecutive default with respect to the payment of monthly instalments. Under such circumstances, the Bank is not favouring in permitting regularisation. 4. Considering availability of effective statutory remedy as contemplated under Section 17(1), it may not be justified on the part of this Court to interdict with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to permit regularisation on the basis of a specific undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all 3 W.P.(C).No.15152 of 2011 challenges against the proceedings and also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedy. Petitioner seeks permission to pay the amounts in default in easy instalments, considering her financial stringency and circumstances involved in connection with illness of the petitioner. 5. Even though interference on merits is not warranted, I am of the view that, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account by paying the defaulted amounts in easy instalments, in view of the relinquishments made. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps initiated pursuant to Ext.P3 notice, provided the petitioner makes payment of the amounts overdue (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due), in 8 (eight) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 30.6.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months, along with payment of 4 W.P.(C).No.15152 of 2011 regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. 7. If payment of amounts as stipulated above is made and the default in the loan account is regularised, then the respondents shall permit the petitioner to make payment of the future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above or any future monthly instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps, on the basis of the notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/