IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19020 of 2009(V)
1. LEENA VARGHESE,ERIKALAVILA PURAYIDAM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,
... Respondent
2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.D.KISHORE
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.DILIP
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :10/07/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
........................................................................
W.P.(C) No.19020 OF 2009
.........................................................................
Dated this the 10 th July, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner had availed a housing loan of Rs. 4 lakhs
from the respondent Bank in the year 2005. The amount which
was liable to be repaid by way of equal monthly installment was
Rs.6300/- and the loan was spreading over a period of ten
years ending in the year 2014. The case of the petitioner is
that she is only a house wife and that her husband is a
‘fisherman’ engaged in a Vessel working abroad, securing only a
meagre income. The default occurred was not because of any
wilful laches or deliberate negligence, but because of some
unforeseen circumstances, submits the learned Counsel for the
petitioner. Despite all the adverse circumstances, the learned
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready
and willing to clear the entire defaulted arrears, so as to have
the loan account regularised and that she will not commit any
W.P.(C) No.19020 OF 2009
2
default at all.
2. The learned Counsel for the respondent Bank submits,
on the basis of the instructions received and also on the basis of
the contents of the statement stated as filed, that as on date, a
sum of Rs.2 lakhs (approximately) is due towards the defaulted
E.M.Is and the petitioner will have to clear the said amount, if at
all, the housing loan is to be regularised.
3. Considering the particular facts and circumstances, this
Court finds it fit and proper to give one more opportunity to
the petitioner to save her property, particularly in view of of the
fact that the petitioner belongs to a lower strata of the Society.
4. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is directed to
clear the defaulted E.M.Is by remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/-
every month. The first installment shall be effected on or before
10.08.2009, to be followed by similar three more installments
to be effected on or before the 10th of the succeeding months.
This will be in addition to the liability of the petitioner to remit
the regular E.M.Is from this month onwards. Subject to the
above, the revenue recovery proceedings now stated as being
W.P.(C) No.19020 OF 2009
3
pursued against the petitioner and her property will be kept in
abeyance. It is made clear that if any default is committed by
the petitioner in remitting any of the four installments towards
the defaulted E.M.Is as above or if any two consecutive defaults
are made in respect of the regular E.M.Is, the respondent bank
will be at liberty to proceed with coercive steps from the stage
where it stands now for realisation of the amount in a lump sum.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk