IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29402 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- VARKEY @ RAJAN, AGED 59, S/O.THEKKEKARA ANTHONY, KIZHAKUMPATUKARA DESOM, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, EDAPPALLY BRANCH, ERNAKULAM, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, PONNURUNNY BRANCH, REP.BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PONNURUNNY, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE UNION BANK BHAVAN, P.B.NO.3667, C.C.38/542, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REP.BY ITS REGIONAL BRANCH MANAGER. 4. SUNNY THEKKEKARA, S/O.ANTHONY, KIZHAKUMPATUKARA DESOM, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 5. GRACY SUNNY, W/O.SUNNY THEKKEKARA, KIZHAKUMPATUKARA DESOM, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. 6. JOHN JOSEPH, S/O.LATE JOSEPH, PARAKAL HOUSE, WARIAM LANE, MANNUTHY P.O., THRISSUR. 7. P.N.MOHANKUMAR, S/O.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT PARUTHAPARA HOUSE, THEKEKARA ESTTE, P.O.EAST FORT, KIZHAKUMPATUKARA, THRISSUR. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.S.P.KURUP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 29402 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. The writ petition is filed by a third person who claims interest over the secured asset, which was already sold in proceedings initiated under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). I am of the opinion that the writ petition is highly misconceived, in so far as basically the petitioner is challenging appropriation of the sale proceeds by the respondent Bank which could not be adjudicated by this court. Therefore the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 2. Having confronted with the above position, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to his rights to approach the appellate authority under the SARFAESI Act. W.P.(C)No. 29402 of 2009 -2- 3. Without entering into any finding on merits of the contentions raised, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to right if any available to the petitioner to invoke statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/