IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 29586 of 2010(W) -------------------------- CMP.3333/2010 of C.J.M., ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAHUL HAMEED.T.A,THATTAPARAMBIL, ABDU NIVAS,THURAVOOR.P.O,CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MANAGER,STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KUTHIYATHODU BRANCH,CHERTHALA TALUK,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,PIN-688 533. 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER (ADVANCES),STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,ZONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM SBT BHAVAN,KOCHI-36. BY SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.29586 of 2010-W ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed in repayment of a loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, proceedings was initiated against the immovable property which is the secured asset. On invoking provisions contained under Section 14(1), the respondents have approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Alappuzha and that Court had appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take over possession of the immovable property. Ext.P5 is the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner in this regard. 2. According to the petitioner, he is a chronic heart patient, who suffered a major attack in the year 2004 and is undergoing prolonged treatment. It is further stated that, W.P(C) No.29586 of 2010-W 2 recently the disease became more worse and he was advised to undergo Angioplasty or open heart surgery. Exts.P1 to P3 documents are produced in support of the above contentions. 3. Considering the effective alternative remedy provided under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, it is not just and proper for this Court to interfere for restraining the proceedings, especially because the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court is in seizin of the matter under Section 14 (1) of the Act. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner sought indulgence of this Court in permitting payment of the balance outstanding, in a phased manner, on the basis of the submission that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy under the provisions of the Act and that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner is still keeping good health and there was no earnest efforts from his side to pay off the W.P(C) No.29586 of 2010-W 3 liability inspite of repeated demands. It is further stated that the loan account is in chronic default and that the petitioner has not raised any dispute regarding the steps initiated under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. 5. It is noticed that, by way of indulgence, this Court had stayed dispossession of the petitioner from the property, subject to condition of payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/-. It is reported that the amount has already been paid. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not desirable, the petitioner can be permitted to pay off the liability within a short period. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property, provided the petitioner remits the entire amounts due, including interest and expenses if any, due in 4 (four) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.12.2010 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. W.P(C) No.29586 of 2010-W 4 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps. It is further 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. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab