IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 28249 of 2010 (E) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. M.P.WILSON, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O LATE PAUL, MURIYADAN HOUSE, NADATHARA MYLAR ROAD, MADATHARA P.O., THRISSUR. 2. FEMI WILSON, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O M.P.WILSON, MURIYADAN HOUSE, NADATHARA MYLAR ROAD, MADATHARA P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.JINU JOSEPH RESPONDENT: --------------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA, RASMECCC, EAST FORT BRANCH M.G.ROAD, THRISSUR REP.BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER/BRANCH MANAGER. BY SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.28249 of 2010-E ---------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are challenging the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), against the immovable property, which was offered as security for availing two housing loans. Consequent to default committed in repayment of the monthly instalments, the respondents had now issued Ext.P1 notice, resorting to steps under 13(4), taking over possession of the property. Contention of the petitioners is that eventhough they made repeated approaches offering payment of the defaulted amounts to regularize the accounts, the Bank is proceeding with coercive steps without allowing such requests. 2. Since the statute provide effective alternate remedy for the petitioners to challenge the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition based on any of the contentions raised against such proceedings. However, it is noticed that pursuant to an interim order issued by W.P(C) No.28249 of 2010-E 2 this Court on 13.9.2010, the petitioners had remitted a sum of Rs.75,000/-. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank that, the amounts in default in both the loan accounts will be more than Rs.1.70 lakhs, less the amount of Rs.75,000/- now remitted. 3. Eventhough interference on merits is not at all warranted, on the basis of submission made by the counsel for the petitioners that thy are relinquishing all rights to challenge the proceedings now initiated, I am inclined to show indulgence in permitting the petitioners to regularize the account by paying the defaulted amounts within a short time. 4. Hence this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance further steps pursuant to the notices already issued, provided the petitioners remit the balance amount in default (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 2 (two) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 15.10.2010 and on or before 15.11.2010. The petitioners shall also make payment of regular instalments due for the month of October and November 2010 along with such payments. W.P(C) No.28249 of 2010-E 3 5. If payment on defaulted amounts is cleared as directed above, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to continue payments of future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the instalments the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to the notices already issued. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings, either before this Court or before any other forum. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab W.P(C) No.28249 of 2010-E 4