IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2008 / 11TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 22861 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MUMTAZ BEEGUM, SHAMEEM MANZIL, PARAYIN VILAKAM, VIZHINJAM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT: ------------- AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER(ADVANCES), STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REGION II, ZONAL OFFICE, SANTHINAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.22861 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a defaulter in repayment of loan amount due from her to the State Bank of Travancore. The bank has initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, for coercive recovery, which is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. She only seeks some time to pay off the amount. 2. This is opposed by the standing counsel for the Bank. The Bank has filed a counter affidavit. According to the standing counsel, the petitioner had entered into a sale agreement for the sale of the security interest, for which she has accepted large amounts as advance without intimation to the bank. She has also not paid any amount out of the advance received by the petitioner to the bank. 3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit controverting the said allegations. According to her, a third party has played 2 fraud on the petitioner, which resulted in the circumstances giving rise to the above allegations and the petitioner has not entered into any agreement as such with anybody for sale of the security interest in question. 4. I am not going into the correctness or otherwise of the rival contentions in this regard. I feel that this writ petition can be disposed of giving the petitioner some more time to pay off the amounts. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner shall pay the amount due in three equal monthly instalments on 3.10.2008, 1.11.2008 ad 1.12.2008. If the petitioner pays the instalments in time, coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondent to continue the 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 3 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.22861 of 2008 ================== 4 Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008 O R D E R The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to pay Rs.3 lakhs within one month and the balance in two monthly instalments. This is opposed by the counsel for the Bank on the ground that the petitioner has already entered into a sale agreement in respect of the security interest with another person and has received advance of about Rs.18 lakhs. The bank shall file a counter affidavit within a week. Post after a week. sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE