High Court Kerala High Court

Smt.Leena Varghese vs State Bank Of Travancore on 17 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
Smt.Leena Varghese vs State Bank Of Travancore on 17 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35452 of 2009(B)


1. SMT.LEENA VARGHESE, ERIKALAVILA
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, POOVAR BRANCH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,

3. BINTHSOFIA.S.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.HARIHARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :17/12/2009

 O R D E R
                  C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  W.P.(C)No. 35452 of 2009
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
         Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009

                         J U D G M E N T

1. Eventhough the challenge raised against the

proceedings initiated under the Securitization and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) could not be

entertained in this writ petition in view of the effective

alternate remedy available, the petitioner submitted that he

is confining relief to the extent of permitting regularization

of the loan account, on payment of the defaulted amounts

along with interest and expenses if any liable.

2. Learned standing counsel appearing for

respondents 1 & 2 submitted that the loan was availed in

the year 2005 with a repayment period of 10 years. But the

petitioner had defaulted payment of the monthly

installments, for a considerable period. It is further stated

that the petitioner has not filed any effective objection

W.P.(C)No. 35452 of 2009
-2-

against the SARFAESI proceedings initiated and the matter

now stands for taking over possession of the secured asset

by virtue of orders issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate

Court under Section 14 of the Act. Therefore the

respondent Bank is not favouring in granting any extended

period for regularizing the account.

3. Having considered facts and circumstances and

submission on both sides, I am of the opinion that some

indulgence can be shown in the matter of permitting the

petitioner to regularize the loan account.

4. If the petitioner makes payment of the entire

amount due pertaining to the defaulted installments, along

with interest/penal interest and expenses if any liable,

within a period of six weeks from today, the respondents

1 & 2 shall permit the petitioner to continue payment of

future installments as per the original schedule of

repayment. It is made clear that the petitioner shall also

make payment of the regular installments due for the month

of January 2010 along with the above payment.

W.P.(C)No. 35452 of 2009
-3-

5. If any of the amounts as stipulated above is

default payment, the respondents will be at liberty to

proceed with further steps pursuant to the order already

issued under Section 14 and on such event the petitioner

will be precluded from raising any subsequent challenge

against such proceedings either before this court or before

any other forum.

C.K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE

shg/