IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2009 / 9TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37859 of 2008(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ULAHANNAN THOMMAN, THOTTIYIL HOUSE, KEZHUVAMKULAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. MR.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, A BANKING COMPLANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER (ADVANCES), REGION III - ZONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - 682 002. 2. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KIDANGOOR - REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 3. ANU.V.K, ADVOCATE, C/O. ADV. DEEPTHI S. NATH, KURUP'S CHAMBERS, COLLECTORATE.P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686 002. R1 & R2 BY MR.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.SAJI VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.37859 of 2008-F = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner availed a loan of Rs.2 lakhs on 5-1-2006. He states that he is carrying on a business in vegetables, provision, dry-fish etc. with the assistance of the second respondent bank. The petitioner created a mortgage as security interest. That includes 5.65 Ares of land with residential-cum-shop building in Meenachil Taluk in Kottayam District. That property stands in the name of the petitioner. The accruals on account of non- payment of the amounts due under the loan grew to an aggregate of Rs.2,22,750/- as on 15-7-2008 and Ext.P1 notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 17-7-2008. Following that, as of now, including under the interim orders passed in this case, a total amount of Rs.92,300/- is stated to have been paid. Under such circumstances, this writ petition is ordered directing that if the WP(C)37859/2008 -: 2 :- petitioner remits the remaining outstandings in six equal monthly instalments payable on or before the last working day of every month commencing from February, 2009, the impugned distress action will be deferred and dropped on satisfaction. It is also clarified that this judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner approaching the bank for any ameliorative benefit. However, such request would be considered only after remitting the first three instalments in terms of this judgment. If there is default in remitting any of the instalments as aforesaid, the benefits of this judgment will stand recalled and the writ petition will stand dismissed automatically enabling the bank to forthwith proceed with further distress action without fresh notice to the petitioner. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/060209