IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23712 of 2010(L)
1. K.RAJENDRAN, VATAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU
... Petitioner
2. THANKAM, VATTAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU
Vs
1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE CHIEF MANAGER
... Respondent
2. SINUKUMAR M.K
For Petitioner :SRI.R.V.SREEJITH
For Respondent :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :15/09/2010
O R D E R
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J
------------------------------
WP(C) NO. 23712 OF 2010
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
Challenge in this Writ Petition is against proceedings
initiated by the first respondent under the provisions of the
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).
Consequent to default committed in repayment of ‘overdraft
cash credit facility’ availed by the petitioner from the first
respondent Bank, proceedings against the immovable
property which is the secured asset with respect to the loan
transaction, was initiated. On invoking Section 14 (1) of the
Act, the first respondent had approached the Chief Judicial
Magistrate Court. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed
to take over possession of the immovable property. Exts.P2
and P3 are the notices issued by the Advocate
Commissioner, the second respondent herein.
2. Considering the effective alternate remedies
2
WP(C) No. 23712/2010
available under the statute and also considering the fact
that the petitioners have not chosen to avail any such
remedies, this Writ Petition cannot be entertained.
However, based on a submission that the petitioner is ready
and willing to pay off the liability, an interim order was
issued by this Court on 29.07.2010, directing payment of a
sum of Rs.1 lakh. It is conceded by both sides that the said
amount was paid in compliance with the stipulation.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent Bank submitted that the balance outstanding
after crediting all payments will be around Rs.1.82 lakhs as
on 31.08.2010.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner made a request
to this Court for permitting payment of the entire balance
within a short time, in instalments, on the specific
understanding that the petitioner is relinquishing all
challenges against the proceedings and that he is not
intending to avail any of the statutory remedies available.
3
WP(C) No. 23712/2010
Having considered the facts and circumstances, I am
inclined to show indulgence in permitting the petitioner to
pay off the entire balance, within a short period.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of
directing the respondents to keep all further proceedings
pursuant to Exts.P2 and P3 notices in abeyance, provided
the petitioner remits the entire balance outstanding in 4
(four) equal monthly instalments, falling due on or before
20.10.2010 and on or before the 20th day of the succeeding
months.
6. It is made that on the event of default in payment
of any of the instalments the respondents will be free to
proceed with further steps pursuant to Exts.P2 and P3. It is
also made clear that the above benefit is granted subject to
the condition that the petitioner will be precluded from
raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings.
C.K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE
dnc