IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 543 of 2011(P) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. ALGIFRI P.M.S/O. MUHAMMEDALI, RESIDING AT KADEEJA MANZIL, P.O.VELIYAMKODE, MALAPPURAM DSITRICT. 2. K.A.RABIYA, W/O. MUHAMMEDALI, KADEEJA MANZIL, P.O. VELIYAMKODE,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. P.M.SHAIKHA, D/O. MUHAMMEDALI, KADEJA MANZIL P.O. VELIYAMKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. P.M.MINANTEESHA, S/O. MUHAMMEDALI, RESIDING AT KADEEJA MANZIL, P.O. VELIYAMKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MALAPPURAM REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, (AUTHORISED OFFICER) FIROZKAHAN P.M., S/O. MUHAMMED SHEREEF, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. HEAD OFFICE, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM - 676505. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 543/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF TRANSACTIONS (PASS BOOK) ACCOUNT NO.3 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 15/05/2008 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION IN CHANDRIKA DAILY DATED 13/05/2009. P4: COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 25/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/11/2010 IN C.M.P. NO.4704/2010 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI. P6: COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 16/02/2011 ISSUED BY THE THAZHEKODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.543 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners challenge proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioners to the respondent bank. This Court passed the following interim orders on; 7.1.2011, “Notice on admission to respondent by speed post returnable within a week. Meanwhile there will be an interim stay against dispossession of the petitioner from the property on the basis of Ext.P5 order, if not already dispossessed subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- on or before 25-1-2011. Post on 28.1.20011.” 28.1.2011, “It is stated that the stipulations has already been complied with. Await return of notice. Interim stay is extended by two weeks Post after two weeks.” 18.2.2011, “Await appearance for the respondent. Interim W.P.(C)No.543/11 2 stay will continue for a period of two weeks”. 4.3.2011, “In spite of service of notice there is no appearance for the respondent Bank. Therefore, interim stay is extended for a period of one month subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees two lakh fifty thousand only) within one month from today. Post after one month.” 5.4.2011, “ I.A.No.4090 of 2011 The petitioner is seeking extension of time for payment of the amounts stipulated in the interim order dated 4.3.2011. In spite of service of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the respondent. Under such circumstances, the time stipulated for payment is extended till 30.4.2011, with a direction to the petitioner to make payment of the amount in 2 equal instalments, falling due on or before 15.4.2011 and on or before 30.4.2011. The interim order will continue till 4.6.2011, subject to further condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) on or before 31.5.2011. and on 6.6.2011, “I.A.No.8418/2011 In spite of service of notice nobody enters appearance on behalf of the respondent Bank. Stipulation was for payment of a total sum of Rs.4,50,000/- in instalments. Since the petitioner has not remitted any amount, I am not inclined to grant the extension sought for. However, as a last chance time stipulated for payment of the amount of Rs.4,50,000/- is extended till 30.6.2011, making it clear that no further extension will be granted under any W.P.(C)No.543/11 3 circumstances and on failure, the writ petition will be dismissed.” Admittedly, the petitioners have not complied with all the interim orders. Therefore, in accordance with the order dated 6.6.2011, I have nothing else to do but to dismiss the writ petition. Even otherwise, it is settled law that the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, has to be challenged in an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided under the Act. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.543/11 4 W.P.(C)No.543/11 5