IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2011 / 13TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37762 of 2010(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- RAJAN CHANDY, KODUMTHARA HOUSE, NIRANAM CENTRAL, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J SAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, NIRANAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER REGION IV, ZONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA. BY ADV.SRI. K.S.DILEEP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 37762 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2011 JUDGMENT Coercive steps initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act) is challenged in this writ petition. Consequent to default committed in repayment of loans availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, the immovable property, which is the secured asset was proceeded against. The respondent Bank had approached the Chief Judical Magistrate Court invoking section 14(1) of the Act and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps to take over possession of the property was initiated without considering the request made by the petitioner for permitting regularisation of the account by payment of the overdue amounts. 2. Eventhough an effective alternative remedy is available, the petitioner had not chosen to invoke such remedies. Therefore interference of this court is not justified. However, dispossession was stayed through an interim order, subject to WP(C) .37762/2010 2 condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/-. It is submitted that the stipulation has already been complied with. 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that, by virtue of the payment now effected, the loan under the caption 'Sahaya Varsha' has been settled and closed. Another facility which is a housing loan availed by the petitioner is still in default. It is submitted that an amount of more than Rs.1.20 lakhs plus interest and expenses is outstanding payment in the housing loan account. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to this court to permit payment of the balance outstanding in instalments within a reasonable time, on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings and that he is not intending to invoke any statutory remedy. Eventhough interference on merits is not proper, I am of the view that the petitioner can be permitted to pay off the liability in a phased manner, within a reasonable time. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to keep in abeyance dispossession and sale of the property, provided the petitioner pays the entire WP(C) .37762/2010 3 balance outstanding along with interest and expenses if any due in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to the notices already issued and on such event the petitioners 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) .37762/2010 4