IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21553 of 2011(T) ----------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------- RAJAGOPALAN A., BINU VILASAM, PAMPURAM, PARIPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM-691 574. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CHINNAKKADA BRANCH, KOLLAM-691 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (RASMECCC), STATE BANK OF INDIA, RAMSECCC, KOLLAM, RAVI'S ARCADE, NEAR IRON BRIDGE, KOLLAM-691 001. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. SAJUSH PAUL, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 21553 of 2011(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DT. 18.9.2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT SANCTIONING THE LOAN. EXT.P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION DATED 21.7.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 31.3.2011. EXT.P4 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT NIL DATED FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS BEFORE THE DGP. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT. 7.7.011 OF THE COMPLAINT. EXT.P6 : COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DT. 29.7.2011. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 5.7.2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 21553 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of the loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner does not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioner seeks facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the bank not to insist on payment of any amount towards premature closure of the loan. 2. This is stoutly opposed by the learned standing counsel for the bank. According to him, the petitioner is guilty of fraud and misrepresentation etc. in the matter and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the matter. He further points out that in view of the attitude the petitioner, the respondents have continued with the proceedings and come to the stage of auction sale. Therefore, it is very difficult for the bank to retrace its steps now is the contention of the counsel for the bank. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: w.p.c.21553/11 2 The bank shall not levy any amount on the petitioner for premature closure of the account insofar as that is applicable only in cases where the party voluntarily wants to close the account prematurely. The petitioner shall pay the balance amounts due in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 1.9.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalments on the due dates without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to the respondents to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge