IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 4441 of 2011() --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. V.I.GEORGE KUTTY, S/O.V.I.GEORGE, VAROOR HOUSE, PERINGALOOR, AYUR POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. EBBY ISAAC, S/O.V.I.ISAAC, VAROOR HOUSE, PERINGALOOR, AYUR POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN SMT.C.K.SHERIN SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, AYUR BRANCH, KOLLAM-691 533, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER (AUTHORISED OFFICER) SHRI.K.RADHAKRISHNAN. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 4441 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Coercive steps initiated under section 14(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act) and the consequent steps taken to dispossess the petitioners from the secured asset, are under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The proceedings in question was initiated consequent to default committed by the petitioners in repaying a business loan availed from the respondent Bank. Contention of the petitioners is that, the steps for dispossession and sale are being pursued without considering their request to permit payment of the balance amounts in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. 3. Considering availability of the effective alternative remedy under the SARFAESI Act, it is not justified on the part of this court to interdict with the proceedings. However, as a gesture of indulgence, dispossession was stayed subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.5 lakhs. It is WP(C) .4441/2011 2 reported that the amount has already been paid. 4. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the balance outstanding will be around Rs.15 lakhs. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that since the loan account is in chronic default ,the petitioners could not be permitted to grant any extended time for payment of the balance amount. 5. Confronted with the above situation, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not intending to pursue any of the statutory remedies and that they are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings initiated. On the other hand, limited prayer is only to permit the petitioners to pay off the entire liability in a phased manner within a reasonable time. 6. Considering the limited request , I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not justified, the petitioners can be permitted to pay off the entire liability in instalments within a reasonable time. 7 . Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps for WP(C) .4441/2011 3 dispossession and sale of the property, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting the entire balance outstanding along with future interest and expenses if any due, in 8 (eight) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default if any committed in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of proceedings initiated before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings either before this court or before any other forum. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C) .4441/2011 4