High Court Kerala High Court

Elsy Paul vs The Authorised Officer (Under on 8 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
Elsy Paul vs The Authorised Officer (Under on 8 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 26784 of 2010(W)


1. ELSY PAUL, PALLIPADAN HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.T.PAUL, PALLIPADAN HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER (UNDER
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CHIEF MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.WILSON URMESE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :08/09/2010

 O R D E R
                         C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J
                  ---------------------------
                     W.P(C) No. 26784 of 2010-W
             Dated----------------------------2010.
                   this the 8th day of September,

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive

steps initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

(SARFAESI Act). The petitioner availed a cash credit facility as well as

a term loan from the respondent Bank, with respect to his business

activities. Consequent to default committed in repayments, the

Bank initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the Chief

Judicial Magistrate Court was approached invoking Section 14(1) of

the Act. Ext.P2 is the notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner

appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, requesting the

petitioner to handover possession of the immovable property, which

is a secured asset.

2. Eventhough various contents are raised against the

proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is ready and willing to regularize the loan account by

effecting payment of the outstanding dues, within a reasonable

W.P(C) No. 26784 of 2010-W 2

time. The said proposal was not opposed by the respondent Bank.

3. Under the above circumstances, eventhough interference

on merits on the challenges raised in this writ petition is not at all

possible, I am inclined to show indulgence in permitting to

regularize the loan account.

4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

respondents to keep dispossession of the petitioner pursuant to

Ext.P2 notice in abeyance for a period of one month. The petitioner

is permitted to make payment of the entire amount outstanding in

the loan account (overdue amount) within the said period. If such

amounts are remitted the respondent Bank shall regularise the loan

account and permit the petitioner to continue payment as per the

original terms of the loan accounts.

5. Needless to say that on the event of failure on the part of

the petitioner, the respondents will be free to proceed with further

steps, and on any such event the petitioner will be precluded from

raising any challenge against the proceedings.

Sd/-

                                     C.K.ABDUL REHIM
                                            JUDGE
                          //True Copy//

ab                                          P.A to Judge