IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2011 / 27TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22385 of 2011(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. MOHAMED THAHA, AGED 53 YEARS, SON OF SHRI MOHAMED KUNJU, RESIDING AT VALIYAKOTTAVILA HOUSE, PALLICKAL P.O., KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 604. 2. NASEEMA THAHA, AGED 45 YEARS, WIFE OF SHRI MOHAMED THAHA, RESIDING AT VALIYAKOTTAVILA HOUSE, PALLICKAL P.O., KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 604. BY SRI.TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SRI.K.M.ABDUL MAJEED, SRI.LIJOY P.VARGHESE. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES ACT 1970, (ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKING), HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN, M.G. ROAD, STATUE AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORIZED OFFICER, HAVING OFFICE AT M.G. ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, BANKING DIVISION, NEW DELHI, PIN-100 001. R1 BY ADV. MR.A.S.P. KURUP, SC. R2 BY ADV. MR.P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G. OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 22385 of 2011(W) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION NO. NIL DATED 10/05/2011 SENT BY THE FIRST PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 28/06/2011 SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE ACCOUNT OF THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED FROM THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ALONG WITH THE M.C. NO.275/2011 SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 22385 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 18th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts defaulted by the petitioners. The petitioners do not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioners only seek opportunity to regularise the loan account by paying the defaulted amounts and to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. 2. However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: If the petitioners pay the outstanding defaulted amounts of instalments of repayment of loan with interest within one month from today, the respondents shall permit the petitioners to regularise the loan account and to pay off the future instalments as per the original loan agreement. If the petitioners comply with the above directions and continue to pay the future instalments as per the original loan agreement on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioners w.p.c.22385/11 2 commit default in payment of either the defaulted amounts or any of the future instalments as per the loan agreement, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge