IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10532 of 2010(N)
1. P.J.PAULOSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent
2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE SARFESI
3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
For Petitioner :SRI.V.K.SUNIL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :03/06/2010
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
---------------------------
W.P(C) No.10532 of 2010-N
----------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is aggrieved of the steps taken by the
respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act for realisation of the
amount stated as due from him. The case of the petitioner is that,
he is aged about 84 years and was a rubber tapper. Because of the
physical difficulties he was unable to do any work, which made him
a defaulter and in turn the Bank proceeded with further steps under
the Act as above.
2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the
petitioner was earlier constrained to approach this Court by filing
W.P(C) No.33522 of 2008, which led to Ext.P1 judgment, whereby
the petitioner had given up all the contentions with regard to the
correctness and sustainability of the steps taken under the Act and
the liability was permitted to be cleared as specified therein.
3. Eventhough the petitioner effected payment, as borne by
Ext.P2 series receipts, the liability could not be cleared in toto,
under which circumstances, the Bank proceeded with further steps
causing the property to be sold in public auction, as borne by
W.P(C) No.10532 of 2010-N 2
Ext.P5. It is also submitted that the sale scheduled on 27.3.2010
did not take place as there was no bidder.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the
petitioner has made some other alternate arrangements to clear the
entire outstanding liability within two months and the present Writ
Petition is only to enable the petitioner to pursue such course.
5. Sri.T.A.Shaji, the learned standing counsel appearing for
the Bank submits that, in view of the particular facts and
circumstances, further recovery proceedings against the petitioner
will be pursued only after two months, so as to enable the
petitioner, who is aged more than ’84 years’, to clear the liability,
more so, since the sale already scheduled on 27.3.2010 did not take
place. The above submission is recorded. It is also made clear that
the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Bank for any other
concessions or reliefs and it is for the Bank to consider the same
and to extend the same to the possible extent.
The Writ Petition is closed.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE
ab