IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2011 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 15662 of 2011(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. K.SATHEESH KUMAR, S/O.KRISHNA NAIR, T.C.51/2214, KAILASAM AMBAZHAKAL VEEDU, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. RAJANI BALA, W/O.K.SATHEESH KUMAR, T.C.51/2214, KAILASAM AMBAZHAKAL VEEDU, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SYNDICATE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, AUTHORIZED OFFICER, UNDER SECURITISATION ACT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN- 695 001 2. SYNDICATE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KILLIPPALAM BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001 R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC FOR SYNDICATE BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.15662/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF A/C IN SMALL LOAN. P2 COPY OF THE RECEIPT INDICATING PAYMENT DATED 20/5/2011. P3 COPY OF THE CMP FILED BEFORE C.J.M. TRIVANDRUM. P4 COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY C.J.M. TRIVANDRUM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.15662 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), consequent to default committed by the petitioners in repaying a housing loan availed from the respondent Bank, is under challenge in this writ petition. The respondent Bank had approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court invoking Section 14(1) and steps for dispossession of the petitioner from the immovable property, which is the secured asset, is being pursued. 2. According to the petitioner, the coercive steps were initiated without acceding to his request to permit regularisation of the account on the basis of an offer made for payment of the amounts in default, within a short period. W.P.(C).15662/11 -2- 3. Heard; standing counsel appearing for the respondents. It is submitted that the housing loan in question was availed in the year 2007 with the repayment period extending to 234 months. But the petitioner had consecutively defaulted payment of monthly instalments and the loan account is declared as 'NPA'. It is further submitted that the amount overdue for payment itself will come to around Rs.1 lakh. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that the petitioners have availed six other loans, which are also in default. Under such circumstances, the respondents have not considered the request for regularisation favourably, is the submission. 4. Considering the effective alternative remedy provided under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, this court may not be justified in interdicting with the proceedings. However, learned counsel for petitioner made an appeal to this court to permit regularisation of the account by payment of the amounts in default within a short time, in instalments. Such a request is made on the basis of W.P.(C).15662/11 -3- an undertaking that the petitioners are relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings initiated and also relinquishing rights if any available to invoke statutory remedy. 5. Considering the limited relief sought for, I am of the view that, even though interference on merits is not warranted, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to regularise the account, in view of the relinquishments made and also in view of the fact that the repayment period has not expired. 6. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the entire amount remaining overdue for payment (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due) in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 15.8.2011 and on or before the 15th day of the succeeding months, along with payment of regular EMIs due for the respective months. W.P.(C).15662/11 -4- 7. If payments of the defaulted amount is regularised as directed above, then the respondents shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above or any future monthly instalments, then the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps, and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb