IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2009 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 9029 of 2007(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- A.M.ANSAR, KURUMPELIL, POLEYATHODE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS RESPONDENT: --------------- THE CHIEF OFFICER, UCO BANK, P.B.NO.509, KHISE BUILDING, BEACH ROAD, QUILON-691 001. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE KARITHANAM VARGHESE SRI.V.J.JOHN SRI.C.I.ABRAHAM SRI.JOSE KURIAKOSE (VILANGATTIL) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 9029/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16.10.06. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 6.3.07. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.3.07. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 9029 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 initiated by respondents for recovery of defaulted loan amounts. At the time of admission this Court passed the following interim order: “ There will be an interim stay for four months on condition that petitioner deposits at the rate of Rs.5 lakhs per month payable on or before the last working day of every month commencing from March 2007. If there is default in remitting any of the instalments as aforesaid, the benefit of this order will stand recalled automatically.” 2. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that although the petitioner has paid some amounts as per the interim order, further amounts are still due, in respect of which he has committed default even as per the interim order. In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to extend further indulgence to the petitioner in the matter. In any event, it is settled law that proceedings under the Act has to be challenged in an appeal WPC : 9029/07 -:2:- before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided under the Act itself. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb