IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22762 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- OA.147/2001 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.V.THOMAS, S/O.LATE C.K.VARGHESE, KOTTACKAL HOUSE, ALANGADU P.O., ALUVA, PIN 683511. BY ADVS. MR.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE SMT.K.V.LEKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------------ 1. THE DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD., HOSPITAL ROAD BRANCH, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. M/S.RUCHI AGENCIES, RAVIPURAM ROAD, KOCHI-16 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, R.NANDAKUMAR, S/O.K.R.KURUP, GURUKRIPA, KANNANTHODATHU LANE, KOCHI-16. 3. K.SHYAMALA, W/O.R.NANDAKUMAR, GURUKRIPA, KANNAMTHODATHU LAND, KOCHI-16. BY MR.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 22762 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 11th August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank invoking the relevant provisions under the SARFAESI Act . The petitioner has raised a contention that no such proceedings can be pursued, till the final disposal of O.A. 147 of 2001, preferred by the Bank, which is stated as pending before the DRT, Ernakulam. 2. The issue, whether the secured creditor is justified in proceeding with the steps under the SARFAESI Act during pendency of the case filed by the secured creditor before the DRT, had come up for consideration before the Appellate Court in Transcore vs. Union of India [AIR 2007 SC 712], where it was held that there was absolutely no bar in this regard and even the Bank was not required to take prior sanction of the Tribunal , as contemplated under the 1st proviso to Section 19(1) W.P.(C) No. 22762 OF 2009 2 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. 3. In the said circumstances, the idea and understanding of the petitioner in this regard so as to keep the proceedings pending, till finalisation of the O.A., is quite wrong and misconceived. It is also relevant to note that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.33291 of 2003, which led to Ext. P7 judgment, making it clear that the petitioner was having an alternate remedy and hence that no interference was possible at at the hands of this Court. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the said verdict the petitioner has already approached the DRT and that the matter is pending consideration before the 'Tribunal'. This being the position, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable under any circumstances and the petitioner, if aggrieved of the steps being pursued by the Bank under the relevant provisions of the SARFAESI Act , can bring it to the notice of the Tribunal, seeking for appropriate interim reliefs to W.P.(C) No. 22762 OF 2009 3 the extent permissible under the relevant provisions of law. The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed accordingly. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk