Compliance with interim court orders is essential; failure warrants dismissal of the petition with an alternative remedy through statutory channels.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26^th day of February, 2026 The petitioner along with his wife as borrower and co borrower respectively had availed a Housing Loan of Rs. 63,65,000/-,in the year 2019 by mortgaging property measuring 2.83 Ares of land in Sy No 166/2- 1-.1 of Kadakampalli Village, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk, in Thiruvananthapuram, District and building and all improvements and structures covered by the Sale Deed No.77/2019/1 dated 14.01.2019 of Thiruvananthapuram SRO.

2. When there was default in the repayment, the bank initiated SARFAESI proceedings against the petitioner.

3. The present writ petition is filed to allow the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in installments and regularize the loan. The learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the same and submitted that on 20.01.2026, this Court directed the petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees seven lakh fifty thousand only) within one month from that day. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays a weeks’ time for remitting the same. Therefore, no indulgence can be granted to this petitioner.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent and taking note of the fact of non-compliance with the interim order as well as the efficacious statutory remedy available as held in the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in South Indian Bank Ltd v. Naveen Mathew Philip [ (2023) 17 SCC 311 ], it is for the petitioner to approach the DRT against the proceedings initiated by the bank. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and it stands dismissed.

Sd/-