IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 4543 of 2008(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. GOPINATHAN NAIR, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.SIVARAMAN NAIR, ANOOP NIVAS, PUNNAPPRA, ALAPPUZHA. 2. SASIKUMAR,AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAPANICKER, SWARNALAYAM, SANATHANPURAM, KALARKODE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. SUDHAN SARAVANA, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.LATE SARAVANA ACHARI, NETHAJI NIVAS, PAZHAVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER VIJAYALAKSHMI SUDHAN, W/O.SUDHAN SARAVANA, NETHAJI NIVAS, PAZHAVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, FEDERAL BANK LTD. REGIONAL OFFICE, RAIBAN SHOPPING COMPLEX, WEST OF MEDICAL COLLEGE JN., ALAPPUZHA. 2. FEDERAL BANK LTD., CONVENT SQUARE BRANCH, ALAPPUZHA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. T.N.VIJAYAN, 'ANAMIKA', KALARKODE, SANATHANPURAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA. R1 & 2 BY S.C. ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE (MANACHIRACKEL) SRI.K.ABDUL JAWAD SRI.P.KRISHNA KUMAR (ALAPPUZHA) SRI.SUNIL J.CHAKKALACKAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 4543 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: February 27, 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition, the 2nd respondent bank had advanced certain loans to the 3rd respondent. For securing the said loan, certain properties were also mortgaged by the 3rd respondent. When default was committed, the bank has initiated proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and it is stated that the proceedings have reached the stage of sale of the mortgaged assets. 2. The petitioners in this writ petition are creditors of the 3rd respondent. For realisation of their dues, suits have been filed and attachments were also ordered by the court. It is also stated that two suits have already been decreed in their favour. 3. In this writ petition the only relief that is sought for is that once the bank concludes the sale of the mortgaged assets, if any WP(C) 4543/08 Page numbers excess amount is available, that amount should be retained by the bank and shall not be paid over to the 3rd respondent. According to them, if the amount is disbursed to the 3rd respondent, it will not be possible fore them to get the decretal amount realised. 4. I heard the counsel for the bank and also the counsel for the 3rd respondent who appeared at the time when the case was argued. 5. From the facts as stated above, it is obvious that suits have been filed for enforcement of the liability that the 3rd respondent has towards the petitioners. Two suits have already been decreed. If that be so, the petitioners are justified in their contention that if any excess amount is available and once that amount is disbursed, there may not be anything left for them to satisfy the decree. This situation has to be taken care of and in that view, any excess amount available is to be retained by the bank. 6. I therefore direct that once the sale is concluded by the 2nd respondent, any excess amount that is available shall be retained by the 2nd respondent bank and its appropriation will depend upon the WP(C) 4543/08 Page numbers orders to be passed by the civil court. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-