IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15609 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.VINCENT, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.RAJAPPAN, MATHA COTTAGE, KANDALA P.O., KATTAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, PEROORKADA BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, PIN - 695 003. 2. THE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 3. M.SHAJAHAN, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEFA, ZAMZAM MUHAMMED VILASAM, THOONGANPARA P.O., KANDALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 490. 4. NASEEMA BEEVI, W/O.SHAJAHAN, ZAMZAM MUHAMMED VILASAM, THOONGANPARA P.O., KANDALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 490. R1 BY ADV. SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, SC. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN SRI.K.M.ANEESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15609 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION IN C.M.P. NO.1238/2010 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P2 : COPY OF THE STATEMENT FROM 1.5.2007 TO 25.052010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK. P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.05.2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT BANK. P4 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4.6.2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE COMMISSIONER IN C.M.P. NO.1238/2010 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE smvd S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 15609 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 4th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a defaulter in repayment of loan amounts due to the 1st respondent bank. The bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner is challenging the same. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks some time to pay the amount. 2. This Court passed the following interim order on 9.6.2011; “Standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 is directed to get instructions. Meanwhile dispossession of the petitioner from the property pursuant to Ext.P4 notice shall be kept in abeyance, if not already dispossessed, subject to condition of petitioner remitting a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- on or before 30.6.2011. Post on 4.7.2011.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the condition in the interim order has been complied with and if the bank gives a statement of accounts, the petitioner is ready to pay the entire balance amount within one month. 4. The learned counsel for the Bank submits that as per his instructions, the amount, as per the interim order, has not been paid. 5. Having considered the contentions of both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioner has paid the amount as per the order dated w.p.c.15609/11 2 9.6.2011, the 1st respondent shall issue a statement of accounts to the petitioner within one week from today. The petitioner shall pay the amount as per the statement of accounts within three weeks from the date of receipt of the statement of accounts. If the petitioner complies with above directions strictly, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner has not paid the amount of ` 3,50,000/- as per the direction in the interim order or fails to pay the balance amount as directed above, it would be open to the respondents to 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