IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 35537 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- IQBAL, S/O. PUTHUVILI HOUSE, KAROOR, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE ALLEPPEY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. A 67. 2. THE ALLEPPEY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO. A67, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE KERALA STATE FISHERMEN DEBT RELIEF COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R2 ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 35537 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 3rd March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the action pursued by the respondents invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act. The case of the petitioner is that he is entitled to get the benefit of waiver of debt under the Kerala State Debt Relief Commission Act, 2008, for which necessary application has been filed before the 4th respondent. 2. The respondent Bank has filed a counter affidavit also producing copies of the requisite documents including the application for loan, stating that the loan facility applied for by the petitioner and sanctioned by the Bank does not come within the purview of the aforesaid scheme, obviously for the reason that the loan availed by the petitioner was for repairing and also for increasing the additional facility of his house agreeing to repay it, as clearly endorsed against entry B of Ext. R2(a). 3. This being the position, the prayers of the petitioner do not call for any interference . W.P.(C) No. 35537 OF 2009 2 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner might be permitted to clear the outstanding liability by way of reasonable installments. 5. Taking note of the extent of arrears, which will come to more than Rs.One lakh, the balance amount, after giving credit to the amount already satisfied, is permitted to be cleared by way of 'six' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be paid on or before the 30th of every month commencing from this month . It is made clear that if any default is committed in satisfying the installments as above, the respondents will be at liberty to pursue further steps for realisation of entire amount in a lump sum, from the stage where it stands now. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk