IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32996 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.K.MOHANAN,PROPRIETOR, M/S.SARASWATHY ENTERPRISES.34 BASEMENT ADAM BAZAR, THRISSU-1. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE BANK OF MAHARASHTRA REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY REGIONAL MANAGER, CHENNAI REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.4,SIVAGNANAM ROAD,T.NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017. 2. CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER, BANK OF MAHARATSHTRA, CHENNAI REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.4,SIVAGNANAM ROAD,T.NAGAR,CHENNAI 600 017. 3. THE BANKIONG OMBUDSMAN,C/O.RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, BAKERY JUNCTION,TRIVANDRUM 695 033. 4. MRS.SUMA MOHANAN,W/O.K.K.MOHANAN, M/S.SARASWATHY ENTERPRISES,34 BASEMENT ADAM BAZAR, THRISSUR-1. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.B.PREMACHANDRA PRABHU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 32996/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE COMPUTERISED STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF PETITIONER DATED 20/9/2011 P2: COPY OF REGISTERED REPLY NOTICE DATED 23/9/11 BY ADV.U.RAVISAHMAR. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26/9/11 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO IST RESPONDENT P4: COPY OF THE REPLY OF IST RESPONDENT DATED 19/10/11 P5: COPY OF THE SEC.13(2) NOTICE DATED 1/8/11 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT P6: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 20/10/11 LODGED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT P7: COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 21/10/11 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 32996 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by respondents 1 and 2 for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner only seeks facility to regularise the loan account by paying the defaulted amounts and to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. 3. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioner pays the amounts stipulated by the bank for regularising the loan account within one month, respondents 1 and 2 shall permit the petitioner to regularise the loan account and to pay off the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. If the petitioner complies with the above directions and continues to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of either the defaulted amounts or any of the future instalments as per the loan agreement, it would be open to respondents 1 and 2 to w.p.c.32996/11 - : 2 :- continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge