IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5306 of 2011(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. BHASKARAN. P.P., S/O.PARAPPU, AGED 60 YEARS, PULLANIPARAMBATH HOUSE, MULLASSERY (P.O), THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. PRASANNA, W/O.BHASKARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, PULLANIPARAMBATH HOUSE, MULLASSERY (P.O), THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, SAHAKARANA SATHABDI MANDIRAM, TUDA ROAD, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, THIRUVAMBADI (P.O), THRISSUR-680 022. 2. THE MANAGER, THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PAVARATTY BRANCH, PAVARATTY (P.O), THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 507. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5306 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), consequent to default committed by the petitioners in repaying a housing loan availed from the respondents, is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. The immovable property, which is the secured asset, was proceeded against and Ext.P3 notice was issued intimating the steps taken as contemplated under Section 13(4). 2. Contention of the petitioners is that the coercive steps were proceeded without acceding to request made by the petitioner for permitting regularisation of the account, on the basis of an offer made for payment of the overdue amounts within a short period. It is further contended that the loan in question was availed in the year 2004 and the tenure of repayment was for 174 months, which has not expired. 3. Eventhough this court was not inclined to W.P.(C).5306/11 -2- entertain the writ petition considering the statutory remedy available, as a gesture of indulgence, the dispossession was stayed subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a sum of Rs.1 lakh. It is reported that the condition has already been complied with. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, on the basis of instructions received, submitted that the total amount due is more than Rs.9 lakhs. It is further stated that the amount overdue for payment, after crediting all the receipts, will be around Rs.1.50 lakhs. 4. Eventhough interference on merits is not justified, I am inclined to consider the limited request made by the petitioners to permit regularisation, on the basis of the specific undertaking made that the petitioners are relinquishing all challenges and they are not intending to pursue any statutory remedy. 5. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the overdue amounts (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 2 (two) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before 30.4.2011 along with payment of regular monthly instalments due for the respective months. In W.P.(C).5306/11 -3- order to facilitate the petitioners for making such payment, the respondents should furnish a detailed statement of accounts to the petitioners. 6. If payment of defaulted amount is regularised as directed above, then the respondents shall permit the petitioners to continue payment of the 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 or any one of the future monthly instalments the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps, and on such event the petitioners will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb