IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 26494 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- K.K.CHANDRABOSE, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN, KAITHAVALAPIL HOUSE, MANJUMMEL-683 501. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER, NODAL REGIONAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN, M.G.ROAD, KOCHIN-35. 2. BRANCH MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, MANJUMMEL. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.S.P.KURUP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------- W.P.C.NO. 26494 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan from the respondent Bank during April 2005, to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/-, which is repayable in 20 years period. Wife of the petitioner stood as guarantor for the loan transaction, and immovable property belonging to the petitioner was mortgaged for securing the loan. Due to various reasons beyond control of the petitioner, re-payments in the loan account became defaulted and consequentially the Bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Sesurity Interest Act. Notice under Section 13(4) of the Act has now been issued for taking over symbolic possession of the secured assets. According to the petitioner when the proceedings was initiated, he had approached the Bank through Ext.P2 representation, requesting to permit regularisation of the loan account by remitting the defaulted installments, which the Bank has not allowed. Hence the petitioner is seeking directions from this court for permitting regularisation of the loan account and for permitting W.P.C.NO. 26494 OF 2009 2 continued repayment as per the original schedule. 2. Heard Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, who on the basis of instruction submitted that, the amount covered under the defaulted installments is Rs.96,100/- and the petitioner is liable to pay the said amount along with interest if any over due. Since the petitioner is a chronic defaulter, the Bank is not favouring regularisiation. 3. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to show, indulgence in permitting regularisation of the loan account, eventhough dispute with respect to merits of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act proceedings cannot be entertained in this writ petition. 4. Under the above circumstance the writ petition disposed of directing the petitioner to make payment of the amount covered under the defaulted installment as on September 2009 along with overdue interest if any due, in three equal monthly installments to be paid on or before 31.10.2009 and on or before the end of the succeeding two months. Petitioner shall also continue payment of the regular installments due for the month of October, November and December along with the above payments. If the payments as above is effected without any default, the W.P.C.NO. 26494 OF 2009 3 Bank shall keep in abeyance further proceedings now initiated, and shall further allow the petitioner to continue repayment of the future installments as per the original schedule. 5. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment if any of the amounts as stipulated above the respondent Bank will be free to take further steps pursuant to notices already issued under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. It is also made clear that the benefit granted under this judgment is subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any further challenge against the proceedings before this court or before any other forum. C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. pm