IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2010 / 12TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 21675 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SANKARA NARAYANAN P PROPRIETOR, AMBIKA AGENCIES, SREEVALSAM CHERUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE -31 BY ADVS. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) SMT.LAKSHMI RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE BEYPORE BRANCH, KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE II FLOOR, THAVOT PLACE, KANNUR ROAD, KOZHIKODE 673 001 2. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE II FLOOR, THAVOT , KANNUR ROAD, KOZHIKODE 673 001 BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 21675 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed a cash credit facility of Rs.6 lakhs from the respondent Bank on 24.09.2007 on the strength of security interest created over the property in question. Finding that the petitioner turned to be a defaulter with regard to the matter of repayment, the Bank proceeded with steps under the SARFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not intend to press any of the grounds with regard to the sustainability of the steps taken by the Bank in invoking the remedy under the SARFAESI Act and that the only relief now pressed before this Court is to permit the petitioner to clear the entire liability before the end of December, 2010. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank with reference to the contents of the statement as given in the chronology of dates and events points out that total liability as on date is nearly Rs.7,01,294/-. It is also stated that the course pursued by the Bank is fully in conformity with the statutory requirements and not assailable under any circumstance. 3. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the 2 WP(C) No. 21675/2010 petitioner that the petitioner does not intend to challenge the proceedings taken by the Bank nor does he intend to avail statutory remedy by approaching the DRT as provided under Section 17, this Court finds that the limited relief pressed before this Court, so as to give breathing time to the petitioner could be considered favourably. In the said circumstance, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh to prove the bonafides within one month; on which event, further coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for the time being and the balance liability shall be cleared by the petitioner on or before the 31st of December, 2010. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in clearing the liability as above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc