IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17760 of 2010(T)
1. K.CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O. LATE SUBBA
... Petitioner
2. SHOBHA,
Vs
1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR & DISTRICT
4. THE TAHSILDAR,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN
For Respondent :SRI.RAJESH THOMAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :08/07/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P. (C) No. 17760 of 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated, this the 8th day of July, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioners availed a housing loan of Rs. 15 lakhs from the
respondents in the year 2005, creating security interest over the
property in question, agreeing to repay the same in 156 equal monthly
installments, which is stated as enhanced to 175 installments later. But
the petitioners did not honour their commitment, under which
circumstance, the account of the petitioners was declared ‘NPA’ and
the respondents proceeded with the steps under the SARFAESI Act,
which in turn is subjected to challenge by filing the present Writ
Petition.
2. When the matter came up for consideration on 09.06.2010,
‘status quo’ was ordered to be maintained on condition that, the
petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. Two lakhs, within two weeks. The
time stipulation was sought to be enlarged by filing I.A. 8630 of 2010,
which was allowed on 29.6.2010, enlarging the time as sought for.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the
petitioner has entered into some agreement with somebody, so as to
cause the properties to be sold and the sales consideration derived
from there will be enough to wipe off the entire liability towards the
W.P. (C) No. 17760 of 2010
: 2 :
respondents, for which some breathing time of at least two months is
sought for. The learned counsel also submits that, the petitioner does
not intend to challenge the sustainability of the steps taken by the
respondents availing the statutory remedy by approaching the DRT.
The submission as above is recorded.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances and after hearing the
learned counsel for the Bank, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit
the petitioner to wipe off the entire liability within two months from
today, making it clear that, no further extension of time will be granted
under any circumstances. It is made clear that, if the petitioner commits
any default in clearing the liability as above, the respondents will be at
liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount
in lump sum, from the stage where it stands now.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
kmd