IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 8489 of 2011(I) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- 1. T.SUNILKUMAR, S/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI, SOPANAM, KOKKIYIL JUNCTION, NILAKKAMUKKU, KADAKKAVUR P.O., PIN-695306. 2. SHEELA RANI S., W/O.T.SUNIL KUMAR, SOPANAM, KOKKIYIL JUNCTION, NILAKKAMUKKU, KADAKKAVUR P.O., PIN-695306. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, VAKKOM BRANCH, NATESH BUILDING, NILAKKAMUKKU, KADAKKAVUR, PIN-695308. 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REGION-III, ZONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. R.S. KALKURA, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.8489 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioners, the immovable property, which is the secured asset, was proceeded against at the behest of the respondents. It is stated that the proceedings initiated under Section 14(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is pending disposal before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. Contention of the petitioners is that the loan in question was availed in the year 2006, with the repayment period extending to 240 months. It is contended that the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to the request made by the petitioners for permitting regularisation of the account, on the basis of an offer made to the effect that the amount remaining overdue will be settled payment within a short period. 2. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the total amount W.P.(C).8489/11 -2- outstanding is more than Rs.25 lakhs. The loan account in question was classified as NPA in the year 2010. Even the amount in default will come to more than Rs.3.5 lakhs, is the submission. It is contended that both the petitioners are not having any regular income or job at present, and even if they are permitted to regularise the account, there will be further default in payment of future monthly instalments. 3. Considering availability of an effective alternative remedy, it is not justified on the part of this court to interdict with the proceedings now initiated. However, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that they are relinquishing all challenges. On the other hand, a limited prayer is made to permit regularisation. 4. Considering the relinquishments made and also considering the fact that the repayment period is 20 years, I am inclined to consider the limited relief sought for. 5. The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in all abeyance further coercive steps of recovery, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting the amount remaining overdue (defaulted instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.4.2011 and on or before W.P.(C).8489/11 -3- the 15th day of the succeeding months, along with payment of regular EMIs due for the respective months. 6. If payment of defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above, then the respondents shall permit the petitioners to continue payment of future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioners will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb