IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22154 of 2008(K) -------------------------- CMP.1477/2008 of C.J.M.,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER: -------------- LAILA BEEVI.A, KANDATHIL, XV/89, KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER & CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KARUNAGAPPALLY BRANCH, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. L.S.SUNIL, ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, KAILAS, NEAR GANAPATHY TEMPLE, KOLLAM. BY SRI.SAJI VARGHESE, SC FOR BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 22154 OF 2008 K ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against the proceedings initiated by the Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 in respect of a property that is mortgaged to the Bank by one Safarudhin Kutty. While the property was under mortgage, the petitioner claims to have acquired title over the same. Whatever it is, fact remains that default has been committed by the principal debtor and that led to the proceedings now initiated and the property is scheduled to be taken over on 25/7/2008, and today this writ petition is filed. 2. True as contended by the learned counsel for the Bank, petitioner is a stranger to the transaction and therefore technically,this writ petition itself is not maintainable. But still, counsel for the petitioner offers that she is willing to pay the entire amount that is due to the Bank. 3. Having regard to the facts of this case, I cannot find fault with the Bank for initiating proceedings nor can I reject the objection taken by the standing counsel for the Bank on the locus standi of the petitioner. WPC 22154/08 :2 : But however, in view of the reality that the petitioner has purchased the property and as she has offered to settle the whole liability itself, I feel an order could be passed on stringent conditions. 4. Accordingly, I direct that if the petitioner pays 1/3rd of the amount due to the Bank before 10 a.m on 25/7/2008, further proceedings for taking over possession of the property be deferred. It is directed that the balance 2/3rd will be paid in two equal instalments, payable on 25/8/2008 and 25/9/2008 respectively. Subject to payment as above, further proceedings will be kept in abeyance and in case default is committed, the Bank will be free to continue the proceedings without any further notice to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp