IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 3237 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR. MURALIKRISHNA DEV, S/O. APPU VAIDYAR, CHERUVELIPADIKKAL HOUSE, VALAVAYAL POST, PAPLASSERY, KENICHIRA, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 596. BY ADV. SRI.B.SAINU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ICICI BANK, 1ST FLOOR, PEEKEEYS DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM-676 505. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, ICICI BANK, MALAPPURAM-676 505. 3. THE AUTHORITIES OFFICER, ICICI BANK, MALAPPURAM-676 505. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM-676 505. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERUIAM, MALAPPURAM-676 505. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MATHEW VADAKKEL SRI.K.K.M.SHERIF -- SC ADV. SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH FOR R1,3 SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN FOR R1,3 SMT.K.K.RATNALATHA FOR R1,3 SRI.K.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR SRI.S.SIVADAS FOR R1,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.3237 of 2011-D ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from respondents 1 to 3, proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. It is alleged that the respondents 1 to 3 had approached the 4th respondent invoking Section 14(1) and coercive steps for taking over possession of the property is being pursued. Contention of the petitioner is that such steps are initiated without considering payments already effected and without properly giving credit to such payments. It is further contended that the steps are now proceeded inspite of specific request made by the petitioner to permit to regularise the account on the basis of the offer for payment of the amounts in default. 2. Considering the effective statutory remedy W.P(C) No.3237 of 2011-D 2 provided against steps under Section 13(4), it is not justified for this Court to interdict with. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings and also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedies. On the other hand, a limited prayer is made to permit regularisation, offering payment of the amounts in default within a short period. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3, on the basis of instructions, submitted that the amount overdue for payment along with interest and expenses is more than Rs.2.74 lakhs. 4. Having considered the circumstances prevailing, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not proper, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery, subject to condition of the W.P(C) No.3237 of 2011-D 3 petitioner remitting the amounts overdue (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 4(four) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.3.2011 and on or before the 15th day of succeeding months along with regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. If payment of the amounts in default is cleared, then the petitioner shall be permitted to continue payment of future monthly instalments, in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above or any of the future monthly instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps. It is made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab