IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 9291 of 2009(F) ----------------------------------- CRMP.745/2009 of C.J.M.,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ANTONY GOMEZ, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.LATE P.M. EMMANUEL, PEACE NEST ,SRA 139, MUNDACKAL WEST, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (CHIEF MANAGER) STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, BEACH ROAD BRANCH, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR RPTS. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE FOR RPTS. SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 9291 OF 2009 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against coercive steps initiated under the Securitisation and Resconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Pursuant to approach made by the respondents before the Chief Judicial Magistrate invoking Section 14(1), an Advocate Commissioner was already appointed to take over actual possession of the property. According to the petitioner, he had effected considerable repayments in the loan account and he is ready and willing to wipe off the liability within a reasonable time. But the request to keep in abeyance coercive steps was not considered, and hence the writ petition. 2. Mr.Pathrose Mathai, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondents submitted that, this court has already issued an interim order in this writ petition as earlier as on 2.4.09 permitting payment of the balance amount in monthly instalments at the rate W.P(C). NO. 9291 OF 2009 2 of Rs.50,000/- each, starting from 1st May 2009 onwards. But the petitioner had defaulted such payments, even though he made some payments. 3.It is notified that the petitioner had filed I.A.No.14410/09 seeking stay of further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P6 notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner, on 7.11.09. This Court had stayed dispossession of the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P6, on condition of petitioner remitting a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on or before 30.11.09 and a further sum of Rs.50,000/- on or before 15.12.09. It is submitted that payments as directed were already made. 4. Having considered facts and circumstance of the case and also considering payments so far made, I am of the opinion that some indulgence can be shown in the matter of permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire balance within a reasonable time, in instalments. 5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make payment of a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on or before 31.1.2010. The respondents are directed to keep in abeyance further steps pursuant to Ext.P6 till such date. If payment is made as directed above, the respondent shall intimate the petitioner about W.P(C). NO. 9291 OF 2009 3 the net balance outstanding, after crediting all payments and after crediting all payments and after considering waiver of interest/penal interest and expenses to the possible extent. petitioner shall continue payment of the balance amount so intimated in four equal monthly instalments thereafter. Falling due on or before 28.2.2010 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the instalment as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to Ext.P6 notice, and on any such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any further challenge against such proceedings either before this court or before any other forum. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE mns