IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 29104 of 2010(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- PRASANNA KUMARY P., W/O.LATE A.S.PRAKASHAN, CHAITANYA, YAMUNA NAGAR II STREET, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- ALLAHABAD BANK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BRANCH, GAYATHRI BUILDING, POWER HOUSE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 036, REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER. ADV. SRI.K.THYAGARAJESWARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.29104 of 2010-K ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T Consequent to default committed in repayment of an overdraft facility availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) was initiated. Ext.P2 is the notice issued under Section 13(2) f the Act. According to the petitioner, the default happened only because of the unexpected set back experienced in business activities and that, eventhough the petitioner had approached the respondent Bank expressing willingness to settle the account in a phased manner, coercive steps were being threatened without considering such request. Hence the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court in interfering with the coercive steps of recovery. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is mentioned that the loan account in W.P(C) No.29104 of 2010-K 2 question is in chronic default, and it was categorized as 'NPA' on 31.3.2010. It is stated that the steps initiated under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is perfectly legal and valid. 3. It was noticed that the petitioner has got effective remedy against the demand raised under Section 13(2) of the Act. It is also noticed that the petitioner has got further effective alternative remedy against the coercive steps if any pursued. Therefore, this Court may not be justified to entertain this writ petition on the basis of merits of the contentions raised. 4. However, as a gesture of indulgence dispossession of the petitioner from the property was stayed subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.3 lakhs, by virtue of an interim order issued on 22.9.2010. It is reported that the said amount was paid in compliance of the stipulations. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court in permitting payment of the W.P(C) No.29104 of 2010-K 3 balance outstanding amount, in a phased manner, within a reasonable time, on the basis of an undertaking that the petitioner is not intending to pursue any of the statutory remedies and that she is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings initiated under the SARFAESI Act. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank is not favouring in granting any extended period on the basis that, the overdraft facility is in default and considerable amount is due from the petitioner. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that, eventhough interference on merits is not desirable, indulgence can be shown in permitting the petitioner to pay off the liability within a reasonable time in instalments, in view of the relinquishment of challenges. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further steps of recovery initiated on the basis of Ext.P2 notice, provided the petitioner remits the entire balance outstanding including interest if any due, in 6 (six) equal W.P(C) No.29104 of 2010-K 4 monthly instalments falling due on or before 31.1.2011 and on or before the last day of succeeding months. 8. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any one of the instalments the respondents will be free to proceed with further steps on the basis of the notice already issued. It is further made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against the proceedings. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab