IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4817 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ANIL RAVINDRAN, S/O.RAVEENDRANATHAN, AGED 46 YEARS, SANKARAM CMC-16, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SMT.PREETHA.V.K RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, CO-OP.DEPT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, KSCB LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, DORAISWAMI ROAD, KOCHI. 3. THE MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN. R2 AND R3 BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 4817 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 17th February , 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a mortgaged loan of Rs. Five lakhs in the year 2003 creating security interest over the property in question . However, since the petitioner turned to be a defaulter, the Bank proceeded with further steps invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act. The notice issued in this regard was responded by filing a statement of objection dated 23.10.2007 raising many a ground. It was also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was ready and willing to clear the entire outstanding liability by way of OTS and the application preferred in this regard was turned down from the part of the Bank vide letter dated 25.10.2007 stating that no scheme was available. It was in the said circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.32654 of 2007. After considering the facts and figures, this Court passed W.P.(C) No. 4817 OF 2010 2 Ext. P3 judgment, whereby the petitioner was permitted to wipe out the liability by way of 'three' equal monthly installments, making it clear that the installments should be paid with due interest and that the first one shall be effected on or before December 2007. The respondents were directed to provide a statement to the petitioner showing the exact amount of installments within 15 days. The petitioner was also alerted of the default clause incorporated therein. 2. The learned Counsel for the respondent Bank submits that although the respondent Bank served the statement of accounts way back in November 2007 itself, in compliance with Ext. P3 judgment, the petitioner did not choose to honour the commitment and was rather trying to protract the matter by filing repeated representations. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ petition seeking further indulgence from this Court, raising several contentions. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the figures given in Ext.P1 are not correct and that the property is an agricultural land, which is not liable to be proceeded with, by W.P.(C) No. 4817 OF 2010 3 virtue of the exemption provided under Section 31(i) of the SARFAESI Act. This Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case, as the matter has become final by virtue of Ext. P3 judgment. 4. There is no case for the petitioner that he has complied with the direction given in Ext.P3. This being the position, no interference is called for. The amount, if any, paid by the petitioner by way of Ext.P7 shall be given due credit to and the Bank shall proceed against the petitioner only for the outstanding liability. It will be open for the petitioner to approach the Bank for other appropriate reliefs/concessions, if any, consideration of which however will exclusively be at the hands of the respondent Bank. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk