IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 690 of 2010(I) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- MINI BENNY, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O.BENNY SCARIA, VENATTU HOUSE, CHOLATHADAM, POONJAR, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK BUILDING, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., ERATTUPETTA BRANCH, ERATTUPETTA. 3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER UNDER THE SECURITIZATION ACT, THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI SMT.S.SHEEJA KUMARY(AYOOR) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 690 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated, this the 8th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the steps taken under the SARFAESI Act; mainly contending that the property involved is an 'agricultural land' and hence it does not come within the purview of the Act as exempted under Section 31(i). Hence the respondents are not justified in proceeding with further steps. The petitioner has got some other contentions as well. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not want to press the various contentions raised, challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank and that the petitioner also does not intend to approach the DRT invoking the rights and liberties under Section 17 of the Act. The prayer is that the petitioner might be permitted to wipe off the entire liability by way of reasonable instalments, stating that the default was only because of some unforeseen circumstances and never due to any wilful or deliberate laches or omission. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Bank as well. 4. Taking note of the limited prayer to have the liability cleared WP(C) No.690/2010 2 by way of instalments, the Writ Petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to clear the liability by way of ‘five’ equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of this month, to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the liability as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc