IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 8829 of 2008(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- MR.SINU SAMUEL, S/O.DANIEL SAMUEL, AGED 29 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDING AT KUZHIYATH SINU VILLA, PERUMPANACHY P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.D.M.NOWFAL RESPONDENT: ---------------------------- THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER (ADVANCES) REGION II, ZONAL OFFICE, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI (SR.) SRI.SAJI VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008 ALONG WITH RP.NO.584 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.8829/2008 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 01/12/2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DTD. 11/03/2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE POSITION OF ACCOUNTS. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss THOTTATHIL. B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)Nos. 8829 & 12084 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of April, 2008 ORDER Adv. Sri. Saji Varghese, standing counsel takes notice for respondent/first respondent before admission. Notice to second respondent in W.P.(c) No.12084/08 is dispensed with. 2. The petitioner availed a loan facility from the State Bank of Travancore. That fell in arrear. But the term of the loan is not yet over. On account of the arrears, the Bank invoked the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No.8829/08 . The bank placed a statement of objections. No orders were obtained in that writ petition. 3. The petitioner, in the meanwhile, filed Securitisation Appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. That has been entertained by the Tribunal and notice issued to the bank, it is stated. Treating that as a fresh cause of action, W.P.(C) No.12084/08 is filed seeking certain reliefs. 4. Fundamentally, the intention of both the writ petitions is the same, either to liquidate the outstanding and carry on with W.P.(C)Nos. 8829& Con.case 2 the transaction, or to delay re-payment. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner quite in extenso on the merits of the claim, it is found that the petitioner, who is a young business man, is desirous of recouping from financial problems, to carry on his business utilising the funds advanced by the bank. Taking a practical view of the whole gamut of the facts, the petitioner, through his learned counsel fairly and rightly states that he may be permitted to re-pay the accrued outstanding and avert SARFAESI proceedings and for this purpose, he is prepared to withdraw the Securitisation Appeal from the DRT. Recording the aforesaid submission, there will be an interim order that if the petitioner remits at the rate of Rs.3.5 lakhs per month payable on or before 25th of every month commencing from April, 2008, dispossession and further distress action will stand suspended for a period of four months. If there is default in remitting any of the instalments as aforedirected, the benefit of this order will stand recalled automatically. THOTTATHIL. B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE H/o. Acd W.P.(C)Nos. 8829& Con.case 3