IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25167 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SARASSAMMA , D/O.LTAE JANAKI, KARYATHU KIZHAKETHIL HOUSE,KULANADA PO, KAIPPUZHA MURI, KULANADA,KOLENCHERY TALUK. 2. SANTHAMMA, D/O.LATE JANAKI, KARYATHU KIZHAKETHIL HOUSE,KULANADA PO, KAIPPUZHA MURI, KULANADA,KOLENCHERY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J.SAM RESPONDENT: --------------- THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, KULANADA BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA. ADV.K.S.DILEEP, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 25167 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ The petitioners availed a loan of Rs.3.5. lakhs from the respondent Bank in the year 2008 creating security interest over the property in question. Admitted case of the petitioner is that the petitioner could not satisfy the monthly repayment on time, under which circumstance the bank declared the account as 'NPA' and proceeded with further steps, invoking the provisions under the SARFAESI Act, which in turn is subjected to challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the default was never wilful but because of some unforeseen circumstances and that earnest efforts are being made to clear the 'overdue' amount. It is also stated that some payments have been effected even after receipt of notice under Section 13(2). W.P.(C) No.25167/2010 2 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits on instruction that the steps taken by the Bank are strictly in conformity with the statutory provisions of law. It is also stated that the original loan amount was Rs.3.5 lakhs and that the outstanding liability as on 17.4.2010 is nearly Rs. 3.2 lakhs. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, after the issuance of Section 13(2) notice, the petitioner has effected some payments and that if the petitioner clears the 'overdue' liability by remitting a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only), the bank is ready and willing to have the loan account regularsied; subject to the condition that the petitioner will effect the regular EMIs without fail. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) by way of 'two' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of this month and the next one shall be cleared on or before the 30th of September, 2010. Subject to this, the loan account of the petitioner shall stand regularised and this will be in addition to the liability of the W.P.(C) No.25167/2010 3 petitioner to clear the regular EMIs as well. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in clearing the 'overdue' amount as above, or if any two consecutive defaults are made with regard to the regular EMIs, the respondent Bank will be free to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) ps/12/8