IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32313 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. T.R.VALSALA, 52 YEARS, D/O.ROSILY, PANANKARA VEEDU, KANJAMPAZHANJI, POOVAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.S.DEEPA, 31 YEARS,W/O.S.VIJAYA KUMAR, SIVABHAVAN, KACHANI SCHOOL JUNCTION, KARAKULAM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.F.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER/REGIONAL MANAGER,STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOTTUKAL BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GOVERNOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, MUMBAI-400 001. 4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF BANKING AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 5. K.SREEKANTH, WHITE HOUSE, THANNIVILA, VEDIVECHANCOIL.P.O, PALLICHAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI FOR R1,2 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ================================ W.P.(C).No.32313 of 2008 - V =============================== Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners were guarantors for a loan availed by the 5th respondent from the respondents 1 and 2. The 5th respondent came to this Court at the stage of notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. Though that was a premature litigation, this Court was benevolent to defer any consequential proceedings on condition that the amounts were paid in terms of the judgment issued on 7.4.2008. The last instalment as per that judgment ought to have been paid by 25.7.2008. The account holder who filed the writ petition did not honour that judgment. Proceedings got dragged on. Possession has been taken with the aid of order under Section 14 of that Act. All that remains is actual possession being taken over. The 5th respondent has not complained about the action taken for classifying his account as NPA or for proceedings against stock-in-trade which was also hypothicated. The question is only as to the action taken against the immovable properties given by the petitioners as collateral security. There is no principle under Section 13(4) which provides for a prior notice before taking actual physical possession because that is a measure under Section 13(4). All that W.P.(C).No.32313 of 2008 - V 2 is provided for is for a notice under Section 13(2), to notify the debtors of the demand. Under such circumstances, while there is no jurisdictional error or any other sustainable objection, petitioners will have to work out remedies, if at all, only before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Without prejudice to that course, this writ petition is only to be dismissed. However, in view of Ext.P2 judgment, the time limit fixed whereby has already run out, it is ordered that if an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- is deposited within a period of two weeks, physical dispossession will stand deferred for a period of four months to enable the petitioners to move the Debt Recovery Tribunal in accordance with law and seek appropriate orders. The period of four months is fairly a long one. This Court is compelled to fix such a period because of the fact that the office of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Kerala & Lakshadweep) remains without a Presiding Officer on regular basis as of now and the officer holding charge cannot be mulcted with over work. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE bkn/-