IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35576 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- LETHA KUMARI, VADAKOOTT HOUSE, PERINGANAM P.O., TRICHUR. BY ADV. SMT.MUMTAZ SHUMSUDDIN RESPONDENT: --------------------- HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY AUTHORISED OFFICER, HDFC HOUSE, PB.NO.1667, RAVIPURAM JN., M.G.ROAD, COCHIN-16. BY ADVS. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL SRI.THOMAS JAMES MUNDACKAL SRI.BOBBY THOMAS BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 35576 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, steps were initiated against the immovable property, which is the secured asset. Ext.P1 is the notice under section 13(2) of the Act. According to the petitioner, on receipt of Ext.P1 notice she had submitted Ext.P2 representation seeking to permit regularisation of the account. Since the respondent Bank has not acceded to such request, this writ petition is filed. 2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Bank, on the basis of the instructions, submitted that the the Bank has not received Ext.P2 representation alleged to have been sent by the petitioner. However, it is submitted that more than Rs.74,000/- is over due for payment in the housing loan account, including interest and expenses due as on date. It WP(C).35576/2010 2 is further submitted that if the petitioner makes payment of the defaulted amount as above, she can be permitted to continue payment of future instalments in accordance with the original schedule. 3. Having considered the fact that the proceedings is only at the stage of notice under section 13(2) and also considering the fact that the petitioner has got an effective remedy to object such demand, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition on merits. It is further noticed that the petitioner has got an effective remedy as provided under section 17(1) if any further steps are initiated by the respondent Bank. 4. However, being confronted with the above situation, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and that she is not intending to pursue any of the statutory remedies. On the other hand, the limited prayer is to permit regularisation of the account. 5. Eventhough interference on merits is not proper, I am of the view that indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the defaulted instalments within a WP(C).35576/2010 3 reasonable time. 6. Under such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 notice, provided the petitioner remits the defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses if any due in 3 (three) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 15.12.2010 and on or before 15th day of the succeeding months. If payment in the loan account is regularised as directed above, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of future instalments in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, or any one of the future monthly instalments, the respondent will be at liberty to proceed with further steps pursuant to notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings either before this court or before any other forum. pmn/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE WP(C).35576/2010 4 pmn/