Petitioner's failure to comply with repayment leads to dismissal of the writ based on available remedy under SARFAESI Act.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI FRIDAY, THE 30^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 10TH MAGHA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 42586 OF 2025 PETITIONER:

SAIJO K.P, AGED 43 YEARS S/O PAULOSE, RESIDING AT KALAPPURAKKAL, MALAPALLIPURAM, PALLIPURAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680732 BY ADV SRI.P.T.SHEEJISH RESPONDENTS:

1 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALA BRANCH, SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, P.O, THIRUVAMBADY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680022

2 AUTHORIZED OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, HAVING ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT, SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM, KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, P.O, THIRUVAMBADY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680022 BY ADV SHRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT DATED THE 30^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 The petitioner had availed two housing loans amounting to Rs.21,50,000/- from the 1^st respondent Bank during the year 2017 by mortgaging his residential plot situated in Pallipuram Village, Thrissur District.

2. Thereafter, due to default in repayment of the loan amount, the 1^st respondent Bank had initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002 (SARFAESI Act) before the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, Thrissur and the said Court has passed an order appointing an Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured assets who had issued Ext.P1 notice. Ext.P3 is the pre-sale notice issued to the petitioner by respondent-Bank. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court to issue a direction to the 1^st respondent-Bank to stay the coercive proceedings pursuant to Exts.P1 and P3 and grant him 30 equal monthly installments to pay off the entire amounts due.

3. On 19.12.2025, this Court granted an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3, on condition that the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.5 lakhs within a period of one month. Today, when the case is taken for consideration, it is submitted that the said direction has not been complied with.

In such circumstances, the remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in South Indian Bank Ltd v. Naveen Mathew Philip [ (2023) 17 SCC 311 ].

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-