Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the proceedings taken by the respondent bank under SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is now submitted by both the parties that the property has already been taken possession by the respondent bank. Learned counsel for the petitioner only seeks time to repay the entire amount and in the meantime request is made for restoring possession to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that he is intending to withdraw the S.A.47/13 filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that the petitioner and the debtor has availed of several opportunities to pay the amount as per directions issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. They had not paid any amount, as a result of which, possession was taken by the respondent Bank. It is submitted that the liability will come to about 140 lakhs and therefore, there is no question of restoring possession to the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits W.P.(C)No.25321 OF 2014 : 2 :
that the petitioner is not entitled for any instalment facility on account of the fact that they did not pay any amount as directed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Having regard to the submission made on behalf of the parties, I am of the view that some leniency can be shown to the petitioner so that an opportunity can be granted for repayment of the entire amount. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of as under:
The petitioner/debtor shall pay the entire amount due to the respondent bank in ten equal monthly instalments, first of which shall be paid on or before 10.11.2014. If there is default in payment of any of the instalments, it shall be open for the bank to proceed in accordance with law and if the instalments are paid in time, the bank shall not take any steps for effecting sale of the property. If the entire amount is paid as directed above, the bank shall restore possession of the property to the petitioner.
jes A.M.SHAFFIQUE, Judge