IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5197 of 2011(Y) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- S.R.SAJUKUMAR,KANDAMATHU VEEDU, KURAVARA,OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM.P.O,NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695125. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- H.D.F.C.LTD,H.D.F.C.HOUSE,VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010,REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 5197 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Coercive steps of recovery initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act) is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, immovable property, which is the secured asset was proceeded against. Ext.P2 is the notice issued intimating steps undertaken as contemplated under section 13(4). According to the petitioner, the coercive steps are now being pursued without considering the request made by him for permitting regularisation of the account by payment of the amounts in default. 2. Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank, on the basis of instructions, submitted that the loan in question was availed in the year 2004 to the tune of Rs.2.5 lakhs, with a repayment period of 187 months, and the petitioner had committed consecutive defaults in payment of the monthly WP(C).5197/2011 2 instalments. It is stated that, even the amount over due for payment will come to around Rs.1.08 lakhs. Since the loan account is in chronic default, the respondent is not favouring to permit regularisation . 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that interference of this court is not at all warranted in view of the effective alternative remedy available under section 17(1). However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay off the amount over due for payment, and to continue payment of future monthly instalments in accordance with the original schedule. It is further undertaken that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any statutory remedy and that he is relinquishing all challenges raised against the proceedings. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not proper, indulgence can be shown in permitting regularisation of the account, considering the fact that the petitioner had relinquished all challenges and also considering the fact that the repayment period of the loan is 187 months. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing WP(C).5197/2011 3 respondent to keep in abeyance all further coercive steps for dispossession and sale of the property subject to condition of the petitioner remitting the amounts in default (defaulted monthly instalments along with interest and expenses, if any due) in 2 (two) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before 31.3.2011 and 30.4.2011 along with payment of monthly instalments due for the months of March and April, 2011. 6. If payment of the defaulted amounts is regularised as directed above, the respondents shall permit the petitioner to pay the regular monthly instalments in future, in accordance with the original schedule of repayment. 7. Needless to say that if the petitioner makes any approach before the respondent, he shall be issued with copy of the statement of accounts, in order to facilitate the payments as directed above. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default committed in payment of any of the instalments as stipulated above, or any of the future monthly instalments, the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court and on such event the petitioner will be WP(C).5197/2011 4 precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings . C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/