IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2010 / 14TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 29718 of 2009(H) -------------------------- ( CRMP.1906/2009 of C.J.M.PALAKKAD ) PETITIONER: --------------- T.S.SWAMINATHAN, AGED 36, S/O.LATE SUBRAMANIAN, THERAYANKODE HOUSE, EZHAKKAD P.O, MUNDUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.JITHESH MENON RESPONDENT: --------------- THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, HDFC HOUSE, NO.29, KAMARAJ ROAD, (NEAR CIRCUIT HOUSE), COIMBATORE-641 018. BY ADV. MR. K.K. CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No. 29718 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 4th January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The coercive proceedings taken by the respondent Bank invoking the provisions under the SARFAESI Act in the attempt to realise the balance due on the Housing Loan availed by the petitioner forms the subject matter of challenge in the Writ Petition. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he had availed a housing loan of Rs.24,04,778/- from the respondent Bank assuring to effect payment by way of installments as agreed. However, because of some adverse circumstances with regard to the business conducted by the petitioner, he could not prove the words by his deed, under which circumstance, the respondent Bank proceeded with coercive steps, as stated above, which made the petitioner to approach this Court challenging the same. 3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the bank as well. On going through the proceedings on record, it is seen that coercive steps were intercepted by this Court as per the interim W.P.(C)No. 29718 OF 2009 2 order dated 23.11.2009 recording the undertaking given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would remit a sum of Rs.6 lakhs within one week as a pre-condition to put him back in possession of the residential house and premises which has already been taken over by the respondent Bank invoking the provisions under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act read with Section 14. Subsequently, when the matter came up for consideration on 07.12.2009, this Court, taking note of the deposit of Rs. 6 lakhs, as effected by the petitioner, directed the petitioner to deposit a further sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs on or before 31.12.2009. This Court also directed the petitioner to execute an affidavit before a Notary Public undertaking to vacate the building unconditionally as and when demanded, on which event, the respondent Bank was directed to permit the petitioner to reside in the house situated in the property. The learned Counsel appearing for both the sides concede that the requirements as above have very much been complied with and the petitioner has been put back in possession of the building. 4. Regarding the direction given by this Court in the last W.P.(C)No. 29718 OF 2009 3 paragraph of the above interim order dated 07.12.2009, the learned Counsel for the Bank submits that the petitioner had to file a fresh concrete proposal before this Court, as to the payment of the balance amount in equal monthly installments within a specified time of six months. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that necessary proceedings in this regard will be filed within no time. 5. However, taking note of the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Bank that the petitioner can be permitted to clear the arrears by way of ‘six’ equal monthly installments, the position in this regard is recorded and the matter is disposed of permitting the petitioner to clear the outstanding arrears by way of six equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 15.02.2010, to be followed by the remaining installments to be effected on or before the 15th of the succeeding months. It is made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the liability as above, the Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps , from the stage where it stands now, for realisation of the entire W.P.(C)No. 29718 OF 2009 4 amount in a lump sum. 6. With regard to the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner might be permitted to approach the Bank, seeking for regularisation of the loan account, having cleared the entire outstanding liability towards the defaulted arrears or to give further time to clear the liability in toto, the learned Counsel for the Bank submits that, this is a matter which can be considered only at the hands of the Bank, if the petitioner submits a representation in this regard. In the said circumstance, the petitioner is permitted to file a representation seeking for the reliefs as above, within one month, on which event, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law, of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. It is also made clear that the contents of the affidavit submitted by the petitioner before the respondent bank in tune with the direction in paragraph No.4 of the interim order dated 07.12.2009 will form part of the judgment for further steps. This however, as well as the direction in para 5 of this judgment will W.P.(C)No. 29718 OF 2009 5 be subject to the orders to be passed by the bank after considering the representation of the petitioner as aforesaid The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk