Muhammed Aji vs Authorized Officer, Chief Manager, State Bank Of India, Chandrasekharan Nair Stadium Complex, Palayam,Vikas Bhavan P.O, Thiruvananthapuram, 695033

C. S. Dias, J

The writ petition is filed to direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to pay the outstanding amount in equated monthly instalments .

The petitioner had availed financial assistance from the respondent – Bank - by creating an equitable mortgage. Due to unforeseen circumstances, he could not pay the instalments on time. The respondent has initiated proceedings against the secured asset under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (in short, ‘Act’). The petitioner is ready to pay the overdue amount in equated monthly instalments. Hence, the writ petition.

The respondent has filed a counter affidavit, refuting the allegations in the writ petition. The respondent has contended that the petitioner has suppressed the material facts in the writ petition. By Ext R1(a) judgment, this Court had permitted the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in instalments. But, the petitioner failed to avail the benefit. Therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed.

Heard; Sri. M.R.Sarin, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.R.S. Kalkura, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

Sri.R.S. Kalkura, on instructions, submitted that the outstanding amount as on 05.06.2023 is Rs.36,09,760/-. In view of Ext R1(a) judgment, the respondent is not willing to grant the petitioner any further instalment facility. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip [2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320], after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicial pronouncements rendered under the Act, has categorically declared that High Courts shall not, unless in extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the Act, in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Having considered the rival pleadings and taking note of the fact that this Court by Ext R1(a) judgment dated 29.04.2022 had already permitted the petitioner to clear off the overdue amount in 10 equated monthly instalments commencing from 25.05.2022, which the petitioner failed to comply, I am not inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and entertain the writ petition.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies, in accordance with law.