IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 24TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 23039 of 2010(D) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.D.SHIBU, S/O.DAMODARAN KALLATTIPARATH, KOZHAKKEKARA, VADAYAR PO VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.N.PADMAKUMAR SRI.GINESH.P. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER THE VAIKOM URBAN CO-OP. BANK LTD NO, 1193, VAIKOM PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 142 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE VAIKOM URBAN CO-OP BANK THALAYOLAPARAMBU PO,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 142 ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J., SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 23039 OF 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging steps initiated under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) against the immovable property which is the secured asset with respect to loan availed from the second respondent Bank. Ext.P1 is the sale notice published by the respondents. Since the petitioner has not chosen to challenge various steps taken under the SARFAESI Act, by resorting to remedy available under the statute, which is efficacious in nature, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings on the basis of the contentions raised. 2. However, as a gesture of indulgence, confirmation of sale if any conducted was directed to be kept in abeyance on condition of the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.1 lakh. It is admitted that the petitioner had 2 WP(C) No. 23039/2010 complied with the above condition stipulated in the interim order dated 23.07.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner made an appeal to the conscience of this Court for permitting payment of the entire balance within a reasonable time, in instalments, on the specific undertaking that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and he is not intending to resort to any statutory remedies. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, on the basis of instruction, submitted that after crediting all payments made, the balance outstanding will be around Rs.3 lakhs. The respondents are not favouring grant of instalment facility because the loan account is in chronic default. Considering totality of circumstance attendant in this case, I am inclined to show indulgence in permitting the petitioner to pay off the entire balance within a reasonable time, in instalments. 4. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of 3 WP(C) No. 23039/2010 directing the respondents to keep all further proceedings in abeyance, provided the petitioner remits the entire amounts outstanding, including future interest and expenses if any due, in ‘four’ (4) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 25.10.2010 and on or before the 25th day of the succeeding months. 5. 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. It is also 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 by approaching this Court or any other Forum. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc