IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2010 / 15TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 23972 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. CHITHAMBARAM ACHARY.M.N., AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. LATE M.S.NARAYANAN ACHARY, PRANAVAM,PO PARIYARAM,ELANTHOOR.PO,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. KAMALAMMAL.P.,AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. CHITHAMBARAM ACHARY.M.N. PRANAVAM, PO PARIYARAM, ELANTHOOR.PO, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. JAYAKUMAR.C., AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. CHITAMBARAM ACHARY.M.N., PRANAVAM, PO PARIYARAM, ELANTHOOR.P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE SMT.CISSY MATHEWS RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, KOZHENCHERRY BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (UNDER SARFAESI ACT) THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, KAKKANATTU APARTMENTS ST.PETERS JUNCTION, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645. 3. KAPIL V.C., ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE AT THE CHAMBERS OF ADVOCATE MATHURE SURESH NEAR ST. LUKE HOSPITAL, PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 AND R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE, SC. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.MILTON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 23972 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 6th August , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners availed two different loans from the respondent Bank, one housing loan and other one cash credit facility creating security interest over the property in question, but repayment was not effected promptly, under which circumstance, the Bank proceeded with further steps under the SARFAESI Act, declaring the account as 'NPA' , which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the default was never wilful but because of unforeseen circumstances, particularly in connection with the sudden downfall in the business. However, with the earnest efforts and bonafides, the petitioners have made a proposal before the Bank as to the manner by which they propose to clear the entire liability, even without seeking for the benefit of W.P.(C) No. 23972 OF 2010 2 regularisation. The learned Counsel submits that the entire liability will be cleared under both the loan transactions on or before 31.03.2011, by way of installments. 3. The learned Counsel for the Bank on instruction submits that the 'overdue' amount in respect of the 'housing loan' is Rs.85,892/-, while the total outstanding liability is Rs.4,75,759/-; with regard to which, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already satisfied a sum of Rs.1,42,300/- after getting Ext.P1 notice. With regard to the cash credit facility, the outstanding liability is stated as Rs.4,21,990/-. This Court does not propose to go into the correctness of the figures , but for observing that it will be for the Bank to furnish a true statement of accounts to the petitioners within two weeks. 4. With regard to the proposal of the petitioners, the learned Counsel for the Bank submits that the Bank is agreeable to have the loan amount satisfied by way of installments on or before 31.12.2010. 5. Considering the fact that the petitioners are intending W.P.(C) No. 23972 OF 2010 3 to close the entire liability and the disputed/extension period required by the petitioners is only 'three' months, i.e., from January, 2011 to March 2011, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioners to clear the entire liability by way of '8' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be cleared on or before 30.08.2010, to be followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. This facility is extended to the petitioners in view of the submission and undertaking made by the petitioners through the learned Counsel that the petitioners do not intend to challenge the correctness or sustainability of the steps taken by the Bank, by approaching the DRT and that the only relief now pressed before this Court is to clear the liability in a phased manner. 6. Subject to the above, the recovery proceedings being pursued against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioners in effecting the installments as above, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump, from the stage W.P.(C) No. 23972 OF 2010 4 where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk lk