IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30955 of 2009(L)
1. DR.VALSAMMA BALAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. CHIEF MANAGER/AUTHORIZED OFFICER
... Respondent
2. BRANCH MANAGER
For Petitioner :SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :02/11/2009
O R D E R
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.30955 OF 2009
------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009
J U D G M E N T
———————-
1. Challenge in this writ petition is against proceedings
initiated by the respondents 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 a housing loan
availed by the petitioner from the 2nd respondent Bank,
proceedings against the secured assets have been initiated. The
respondents have issued Ext.P1 notice under Section 13(4) of the
Act taking over possession of the property. According to the
petitioner the repayment period is 15 years from 2005. It is
submitted that the default in repayment on a regular basis
happened only due to some unforeseen financial stringencies.
The petitioner expressed her willingness to pay off the arrears
within a short time to regularise the loan account. According to
the petitioner eventhough the Bank was approached with such a
proposal, the same was not acceded to. Hence the writ petition
is filed.
2. Heard standing counsel appearing for respondent
W.P.(C).30955/09-L 2
Bank, who on the basis of instructions submitted that, the loan in
question was availed in 2005 and there was failure on the part of
the petitioner in proper utilisation of the loan amount for
constructing the residential house as per the proposed plan. It is
submitted that the total amount outstanding in the loan account
will be about Rs.8 lakhs. It is further submitted that the
defaulted installments along with interest and expenses itself
will be Rs.2,51,000/- as on date. The Bank is not favouring any
extension of time to the petitioner to regularise the account.
3. Having considered submission on both sides and facts
and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the
petitioner can be given a chance to regularise the account within
a short period by paying the defaulted installments.
4. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the
petitioner to make payment of the amounts pertaining to the
defaulted installments, along with overdue interest and expenses
if any liable, in 4 (four) equal monthly installments starting from
15.12.2009 and on or before any of the 15th day of the three
succeeding months. The petitioner shall also continue payment
of the regular installments due from the month of December
2009 onwards along with the above said payments.
5. In case the account is regularised through payments
as directed above, the respondent Bank shall permit the
W.P.(C).30955/09-L 3
petitioner to continue repayment as per the original schedule.
6. It is made clear that on the event of default in
payment of any of the installments as stipulated above, the
respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps
pursuant to the notices already issued and on such event the
petitioner will be precluded from raising any further challenge
against proceedings either before this court or before any other
forum.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.
okb