IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18684 of 2011(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. FAHAD JALAL, D-1, J.K.ROYAL HOUSE CHAMMANI ROAD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR ERNAKULAM 682 017. 2. SUJA RIA RANI D-1, J.K.ROYAL HOUSE ,CHAMMANI ROAD, KATHRIKADAVU, KALOOR ERNAKULAM- 682 017. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, UCO BANK, ZONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM – 682 011. 2. THE UCO BANK, REP BY ITS CHEIF MANAGER, SWARAJ ROUND EAST, THRISSUR- 680 001. R1 & R2 BY SRI. P.V. SURENDRANATH, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.18684/2011-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBIT: EXT.P.1: THE ORIGINAL NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS UNDER SEC. 13(2) OF THE SRFAESI ACT BY THE R.2. DTD. 05/05/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 18684 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JULY, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are defaulters of repayment of loan amount taken from the Respondents. The respondents initiated proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Petitioner challenges the same. Standing Counsel for the respondents points out that the writ petition is premature, since only a notice under Section 13 (2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 has been issued. I find merit in the contention. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as premature without prejudice to the petitioner to file reply to the notice and to take up further proceedings appropriately. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. AMG True copy P.A to Judge