IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 7523 of 2010(M) --------------------------------------- CMP.1727/2009 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COAURT, MANJERI .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. SUBAIDA, D/O.MUHAMMED KUTTY, CHANAYIKKAL HOUSE, KADAVANDU, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. C. MUHAMMED KUTTY, S/O.MOIDUNNI, CHANAYIKKAL HOUSE, KADAVANDU, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.D.KISHORE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE VIJAYA BANK, PONNANI BRANCH, M.A. ARCADE, CHANDAPADI, PONNANI-679 577, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, VIAJAYA BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, JOSE ANNEX, JOS JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.K.ANAND, SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C).No. 7523 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner who is the daughter of the 2nd petitioner, had availed a business loan from the respondent bank in the year 2007 and the 2nd petitioner stood as guarantor, creating security interest over the property. The amount due was not satisfied on time, under which circumstance, there was no other alternative for the bank but to proceed with further steps invoking the machinery under SARFAESI Act, which forms the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits on instructions, that the account was declared as 'NPA' in March 2007 and only some nominal amounts have been paid by the petitioner thereafter. It is also stated that the outstanding liability is around Rs.3.25 lakhs. W.P.(C).No. 7523 of 2010 2 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners do not intend to challenge the coercive steps taken by the bank under the Act resorting the alternative remedy available under the statute by approaching the DRT, and that the only prayer is to give some breathing time to clear the entire outstanding liability, contending that the default was never wilful, but because of some unforeseen circumstances. 4. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioners to clear the liability, under the loan account in a phased manner. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to satisfy the entire outstanding amount by way of six equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before the 10th of April 2010 and the remaining installments shall be satisfied on or before the 10th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, all recovery proceedings being pursued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any W.P.(C).No. 7523 of 2010 3 default is committed in satisfying the liability as above, the respondent bank is at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE nl