IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 242 of 2009(D) ------------------------ SA.48/2008 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.S. ANTONY, S/O.M.K. SEBASTIAN, AGED 40 YEARS, MATTAMMAL HOUSE, VAZHAKKAL, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CHENGANNUR BRANCH, M.C. ROAD, CHENGANNUR. ADDL.4. VIJAYAPRASAD, S/O.KARUNAKARAN PILLAI, PREMIER STEEL & ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES, MUNDANCAVU, CHENGANOOR. 5. L.REMADEVI, W/O.VIJAYAPRASAD, KANNANGHATTU HOUSE, MUTHAVAZHI, PANDANADU P.O., CHENGANOOR. 6. SHAMSUDHEEN KUNJU P.A., S/O.ABUDL RAHIMAN KUNJU PADINJAREPALKEEZHIL, MANNAR P.O., MANNAR. ADDL.R4 TO R6 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 5.1.09 ON I.A.NO.168/09) R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.242 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5nd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner faces proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Notice was published under that Act, measure was taken and the property put for sale. The petitioner filed S.A.48/08 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and is pending. The sale was conducted during the pendency of that S.A. since the DRT did not grant any interim order. This Court issued an interim order on 5.1.2009, deferring all further action, including documentation in favour of the auction purchaser if an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- is deposited within three weeks therefrom. I.A.No.1212/09 was filed on 22.1.2009 seeking two weeks' time. That period expires today. Therefore, I adjourned that I.A. to be listed today. Even then, no payment is made. I do not find any ground to issue any order in favour of the petitioner, particularly when his alternate remedy before the DRT is pending before that authority as a securitisation application. The writ petition fails. The same is dismissed without prejudice to contentions before the DRT. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.11/2.