IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21375 of 2008(T) -------------------------- CMP.5890/2007 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. S. PRIJI, PROPRIETOR, HOTEL ABHIRAMI, KATTAKADA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUNIL KUMAR, V. GUARANTOR, KOVILAZAKAM,E-13, JAWAHAR NAGAR, KOWDIAR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, AUTHORISED OFFICER, COMMERCIAL BRANCH - 4350, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. BY SHRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.21375 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are challenging the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002(“the Act” for short). They approached this Court earlier twice. In fact I myself dismissed one of them without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to file an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. It appears that the petitioners have approached the DRT, but was not successful. Whatever that be, in so far as it is settled law that the proceedings under the Act have to be challenged before the DRT in an appeal as provided under the Act, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. In any event, I am not also satisfied of the bona fides of the petitioners. Now more than Rs.5 crores is due from the petitioners in repayment of the loans as stated by the standing counsel for the Bank. For all the above reasons, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2