IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 943 of 2011(P) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- N.THRIVIKRAMAN POTTY, PROPRIETOR, M/S. SURYA ASSOCIATES, S.R.P.MARKET P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER (AUTHORISED OFFICER), REGISTERED OFFICE, ALUVA-683 101. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., THODIYOOR BRANCH, KARUNAGAPPALLY-690 518. 3. M/S. BHARATH EARTH MOVERS LTD., (BEML), 23/1, 4TH MAIN, S.R.NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. SRI. T.R.SHAJI, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. INDIAN MOTORS, DOOR NO.II/380, THRISSUR ROAD, ANGAMALY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 572. R1 & R2 BY ADV. GEORGE VARGHESE MANCHIRACKAL.S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 943 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner is a contractor executing civil works for various companies and Government organisations throughout the country. According to the petitioner, huge amounts are due with respect to works executed by the petitioner for different agencies like Chennai Port, Cochin Port Trust etc. The petitioner availed two financial facilities from the 1st respondent Bank for purchase of some earth moving machinery. Due to unforeseen manufacturing defects the machinery supplied became not functioned and it was already taken back to the supplier, since the petitioner had sustained huge loss. Due to defects with respect to the machinery purchased and because of non payment of bills due from various agencies, repayments in the loan accounts became irregular and as a consequence respondents 1 and 2 had initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act). Ext.P11 notice was issued as contemplated under section 13(2) of the Act. Eventhough the WP(C).943/2011 2 petitioner requested for time through Ext.P12 representation, coercive steps were pursued by respondents 1 and 2 without considering such request. Under the above circumstances, petitioner seeks interference of this court. 2. Considering the fact that the petitioner has got effective remedy to object the demand under section 13(2) and further remedy to invoke section 17(1), it is not justifable on the part of this court to interfere with the proceedings at this stage. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the liability within a reasonable time in instalments and that he do not want to pursue the statutory remedies, and that he is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings. 3. Heard, counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2. It is submitted that a cash credit facility as well as a term loan was availed by the petitioner and the periods for repayment is now remaining expired. It is submitted that total balance outstanding payment is more than Rs.38 lakhs. 4. Considering the limited request raised by the petitioner to permit payment of the balance amount in instalments, I am of the view that such relief can be granted WP(C).943/2011 3 since the petitioner had relinquished all challenges. 5. Under such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps of recovery, provided the petitioner remits the entire balance outstanding along with future interest in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments falling due on or before 28.2.2011 and on or before the last day of the succeeding months. 6. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any of the instalments as stipulated above, respondents will be free to proceed with further steps pursuant to notices already issued and on such event the petitioner will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings . 7. It is also made clear that the contentions raised in this writ petition relating to the rights enforceable against respondents 3 and 4 is left open for adjudication in appropriate proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).943/2011 4