IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 32005 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MRS.ANAMMA SUNNY ,W/O. SUNNY, AGED 40 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S STUDIO 21, NO.30/1918, MAMPRA ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. SUNNY S, S/O. SATHYANESAN, AGED 46 YEARS, M/S STUDIO 21, NO.30/1918, MAMPRA ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM SRI.R.RATHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. I.N.G. VYSYA BANK LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, PARAPPILLI ARCADE , PANAMPALLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN -36, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSO VICE PRESIDENT & AUTHORIZED OFFICER, 2. THEBRANCH MANAGER, ING VYSYA BANK, PANAMPALLY NAGAR BRANCH. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.JOHN, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.32005 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5nd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioners availed a loan from the respondent bank. On default in repayment of the said Over Draft, the respondent initiated action under the SARFAESI Act. That led to Ext.P8 measure on 19.9.2008 under Section 13(4). This writ petition is filed on 29.10.2008 challenging those proceedings and also seeking a direction to regularise the transaction. Pending writ petition, the respondents have intimated the petitioners their decision not to regularise the transaction. It is also stated in Ext.R2(a) that the objections raised are untenable. If at all the petitioners have a further remedy, that could be only by recourse to Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act in accordance with law. A writ petition as such would not lie against the respondents. Violation of the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and other attendant grounds are accordingly left open to be raised before the Debts Recovery Tribunal in accordance with law. The classification of the account as NPA in accordance with the WPC.32005/08 Page numbers norms of the Reserve Bank of India is the primary cause of action for initiation of steps under Section 13(2). Therefore, the classification may also be a ground that could be raised before the DRT. Otherwise, such issue would continue to be available even thereafter. It is not possible for this Court to compel the respondent, a bank, to mould its commercial transaction in any particular manner. More so, when it has expressed its decision that it is not prepared to renew or regularise the transaction. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to what is stated above. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.11/2.