IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 3605 of 2011(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- V.V.VINOD, 47/633, KIRAN NIVAS, POONITHURA, VYTTILA P.O., KOCHI-19. BY ADVS. SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (VATTATHARA), SRI.T.JEEJAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. FEDERAL BANK LTD., POONITHURA BRANCH REP.BY ITS MANAGER, KOCHI - 682 038. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD., POONITHURA BRANCH, PALATHINGAL BUILDINGS, PETTA JUNCTION, POONITHURA P.O., KOCHI-682 038. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.A.ANTONY, SC, SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.3605 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, immovable property, which is the secured asset, was proceeded against invoking Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). According to the petitioner, the loan in question was availed in the year 2007 with a repayment period of 20 years and the coercive steps are now being pursued without acceding to his request for permitting regularisation of the account. Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this court. 2. Heard, counsel appearing for the respondent Bank. It is submitted that the loan account is in chronic default and the amount overdue for payment itself is more than Rs.3.50 lakhs. Under such circumstances the Bank is not favouring in permitting regularisation. 3. Eventhough this court is not inclined to interfere in the proceedings, in view of the effective alternative remedy W.P.(C).3605/2011 -2- available, counsel for the petitioner made a limited prayer to permit regularisation, on the basis of an offer to make payment of the amounts in default within a short time. Such a prayer is made on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that he is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings. 4. Considering the limited prayer made, in view of the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting regularisation of the account, especially since the petitioner had relinquished all challenges. 5. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 notice, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the amounts overdue for payment (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before the last day of the two succeeding months, along with payment of regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. 6. If payment of the amounts in default is regularised as directed above, then the respondents shall permit the petitioner W.P.(C).3605/2011 -3- to continue payment of future monthly instalments, in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above or any future monthly instalments, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb