IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6415 of 2011(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CHANDRABABU, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, MANJIRA HOUSE, KUMARAKOM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.F.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE KOTTAYAM DIST. CO-OP. BANK LTD., POST BOX NO.140, KOTTAYAM-686 001. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ami/ C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.6415 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) initiated against the petitioner at the behest of the respondent Bank, is the subject matter of challenge. The petitioner had already invoked section 17(1) before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. Through Ext.P4 interim order issued by that Tribunal, further proceedings were stayed, subject to certain stipulations contained therein. Since the petitioner failed in complying with those conditions, recovery steps were pursued. 2. Considering pendency of the matter before the DRT, this Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. However, counsel for the petitioner undertook that the securitisation application will be withdrawn and the petitioner may be permitted to make payment of the entire 2 W.P.(C).No.6415 of 2011 balance in a phased manner. On that basis, indulgence was shown in staying further steps subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) and subject to condition of the petitioner withdrawing S.A.No.158 of 2009, which was pending before the DRT. 3. It is reported that, the payment stipulated as above has already been complied with. It is also stated that a memo has already been filed before the DRT withdrawing the petition which is pending. 4. Heard ; counsel appearing for the respondent bank. It is stated that the amount was in default for a considerable period and the petitioner was not taking any effective steps to pay off the liability. 5. Considering the limited prayer made for permitting payment of the entire amount in instalments within a reasonable time, I am of the view that, even though interference on merits is not warranted, such a relief can be considered. 3 W.P.(C).No.6415 of 2011 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps subject to condition of the petitioner, remitting the entire balance outstanding, along with interest and expenses if any due, in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and on or before last day of the succeeding months. 7. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments as stipulated above, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps, on the basis of the notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/