IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2009 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 3078 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.S.SUNILKUMAR, AGED 42, S/O.V.K.SREEDHARAN, 25/48 A, VANCHINAD HOUSE, MARKET ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SURESH KUMAR SMT.P.RESHMA KABIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY MINISTRY OF BANKING AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, DEPT. OF BANKING OPERATIONS & DEVELOPMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, HAVING REGD OFFICE AT BANK JUNCTION, ALUVA AND HAVING A BRANCH AT PALLURUTHY REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 4. CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER, FEDERAL BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWERS, MARINE DRIVE, COCHIN-31, GENERAL MANAGER. ADV. SRI.A.ANTONY, SC SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 3078 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the steps taken by the respondent Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioner has approached this court challenging the same. An interim order was passed on 29.01.2009 intercepting all further proceedings subject to the condition that the petitioner remitted a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- on or before 02.02.2009. Subsequently, the interim order was extended on 04.02.2009 till 03.03.2009 on condition that the petitioner deposited a further sum of Rs.8,00,000/- on or before 02.03.2009 and yet another 8,00,000/- on or before 02.04.2009, making clear that if any default was made in clearing the instalment, the benefit of the interim order would stand vacated. 2. The matter come up for consideration before this court yesterday. There was no representation for the petitioner. Today also it is not a case of exception. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that the petitioner did not choose to comply with the condition imposed by this court. In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is dismissed for default. (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) dnc