IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7008 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABU.M, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.LATE THAMPAN, SUNITHA NILAYAM, VATTAPOYYIL, NILESHWARAM, KASARGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAVI SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE SMT.CISSY MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KASARGODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, NAYAK'S ROAD, KASARGODE-671121. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (SARFAESI ACT), THE KASARGODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NAYAK'S ROAD, KASARGODE-671121. ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN,SC,KASARGOD DIST.CO.BAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) No. 7008 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated, this the 4th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.1,00,000/- from the respondent Bank in the year 2004 in connection with his business. However, the amount could not be repaid on time, under which circumstance, the respondents proceeded with further steps for realisation of the due amount invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits on instructions, that admittedly the petitioner could effect only a sum of Rs.10,496/- as stated in paragraph 1 of the Writ Petition and this being the position, the steps taken by the respondent are perfectly within the four walls of law and not assailable under any circumstance. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the default was never wilful, but because of the adverse circumstances in connection with the business and also coupled with the huge expenditure which had to be incurred by the petitioner for treatment of his mother for nearly six years. It is also stated that the petitioner is satisfying some other liability as well, under a different loan transaction WP(C) No.7008/2010 2 and despite all such adverse circumstances earnest efforts have been made to repay the due amount; for which some breathing time is sought for. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 50% of the due amount forthwith and the balance might be permitted to be cleared by way of reasonable instalments. 4. After hearing both the sides, the petitioner is directed to deposit 50% of the amount due on or before the 30th of this month and the balance shall be satisfied by way of 'five' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of April 2010, to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear the if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the liability as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc