IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29546 of 2011(P) --------------------------------------- [C.M.P.NO.420/2011 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KALEPETTA] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- K.V.CHANDRAMATHI, W/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, AGED 55 YEARS, MATTAKUDA HOUSE, VADUVANCHAL P.O. THOMATTUCHAL VILLAGE, SULTHAN'S BATHERY TALUK, WYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 577. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP MATHEW. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, REGION NO.2, ZONAL OFFICE, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-673 004. BY SRI. T. SETHUMADHAVAN, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.29546/2011-P: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF POSSESSION DATED 16/2/2010 PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK IN THE NEWS PAPERS UNDER RULE 8(2) OF THE SECURITY INTEREST (ENFORCEMENT) RULES, 2002. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CMP NO.420/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND HER SON BEFORE THE C J M, KALPETTA. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RESCHEDULING THE REPAYMENT OF THE AMOUNT DUE TO THE RESPONDENT BANK IN INSTALLMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 17/9/2011 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KALPETTA 17. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PASSBOOK INDICATING THE REPAYMENTS MADE BY THE PETITIONER FROM 11/3/2010 TO 20/9/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.29546 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts due from the petitioner's son for repayment of which the petitioner was a guarantor. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner only seeks facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments. 2. This is opposed by the learned counsel for the bank. However, taking a lenient view, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The respondent shall permit the petitioner to pay off the balance amount due in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 1.12.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner W.P.(C)No.29546/11 2 pays the instalments on due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any one of the instalments, it would be open to the respondent to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.29546/11 3