IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 10594 of 2011(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.V.GOKULDAS,AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.K.V.MOOTHORAN,KIZHAKKEVEETTIL HOUSE, THODUVATTI,PUTHENKUNNU P.O,SULTHAN BATHERY, WYANAD- 673 592. BY ADVS. SRI.H.B.SHENOY, SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY, SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY, SRI.ABU MATHEW, SRI.SOBHAN GEORGE, SRI.V.SHYAM. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,AUTHORISED OFFICER,RECOVERY DEPARTMENT,CIRCLE OFFICE,SHATHABDI BHAVAN,MINI BYE PASS ROAD, GOVINDAPURAM,KOZHIKODE- 673 016. BY ADV. SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.10594/2011-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AWARD DTD. 09/11/2009 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM IN I.D. NO.18/2007. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 19/08/2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN I.A. NO. 4511/2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.6578/2010. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 20/01/2011 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DTD 24/01/2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 29/01/2011 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DTD. 09/02/2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 23/02/2011 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 10594 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 4 th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an employee of the respondent bank. Disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against him. He has been suspended from service. He had also availed of a loan from the bank. He committed default in repayment of the same. The bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, which are under challenge in this writ petition. The contention of the petitioner is that the monthly EMI payable by the petitioner is only around ` 6000/- and the subsistence allowance due to the petitioner comes to ` 12,000/- per month. Therefore, the respondent can very well adjust the subsistence allowance as EMI, for which the petitioner has already agreed to by filing a consent letter in that regard. 2. The learned standing counsel for the bank takes the stand that the defaulted instalment amounts would come to ` 5,68,974/- and the total amount due as on 23.6.2011 is ` 10,33,456/-. Therefore, the subsistence allowance is not all sufficient to pay even the defaulted amount, is his contention. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of w.p.c.10594/11 2 opinion that if the petitioner pays the defaulted instalment amount of ` 5,68,974/-, the petitioner can be permitted to continue paying the monthly instalments as per the original loan agreement. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioner shall pay an amount of ` 5,68,974/- within one month from today. Thereafter, the loan account shall be regularised and the petitioner shall be allowed to pay future instalments on the due dates in accordance with the original loan agreement. If the petitioner has submitted a consent letter for adjusting the subsistence allowance against the loan amount, the respondent may adjust the same against the monthly EMI. If the monthly subsistence allowance is not sufficient to meet the EMI, the petitioner shall make good the deficit in monthly instalments. If the petitioner complies with the above directions without default, further proceedings under the Act shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of either the ` 5,68,974/- or any one instalment as directed above, the respondent can continue the 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 w.p.c.10594/11 3