IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2010 / 9TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20375 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- T.T. THRESYAMMA, THENGUMPILLIL HOUSE, AGE 55 YEARS, MARAYOOR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.DIVAKARAN, SRI.VINUCHAND. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS THE CHIEF MANAGER (ADVANCES) SBT, REGION V- ZONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, SBT BHAVAN, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 036. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MARAYOOR PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN- 685 020. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.20375 of 2010-V ---------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner had availed a loan of Rs.2.5 lakhs from the second respondent in December 1999, creating security interest over the property in question. But the repayment could not be effected on time; under which circumstances, the bank categorized the account as 'NPA' and proceeded with further steps under the SARFAESI Act, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the default was never wilful, but because of sudden downfall in the business and loss of market. It is also stated that the petitioner has undergone a 'surgery' and was laid up for more than six months. The learned counsel further submits that earnest efforts are being taken to clear the liability and that the petitioner does not intend to challenge the steps taken by the Bank by pressing any of the grounds in the Writ Petition or by availing the statutory remedy under Section 17 of the Act. 3. Heard the learned standing counsel for the respondent sW.P(C) No.20375 of 2010-V 2 Bank as well, who submits with reference to the instructions received that, Section 13(2) notice was issued on 6.2.2010 and that the Bank has been showing much leniency to the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that the entire outstanding liability will come about Rs.5.2 lakhs. 5. Considering the particular facts and circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to clear the entire outstanding liability by way of 'six' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30th of July 2010, to be followed similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. Recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in clearing the outstanding amount as above, the respondents will be at liberty 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 ab