IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9370 of 2011(U) --------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- E.K. ANILAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S. ESTEEM MARUTI SERVICES, CURZON ROAD, KOTTAMUKKU, KOLLAM - 691 013. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.DHANIL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. CANARA BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ANANDAVALLEESWARAM, KOLLAM - 691 013. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, UNDER SARFAESI ACT, ANANDAVALLEESWARAM, KOLLAM - 691 013. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.9370 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- The challenge is against Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Considering the effective remedy provided under Section 13(3A) it is not proper and justified on the part of this court to interfere. Eventhough it is stated that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 reply to the demand raised under Section 13(2), learned counsel for the respondent Bank on instructions submitted that no such reply was received by the respondents. 2. However, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner need only reasonable time to pay off the liability and that he is ready to make payment of the entire amount in instalments within a reasonable period. It is left open to the petitioner to approach the Bank with such a request and if any such representation is received, the respondents shall consider the same and take a decision thereof. The writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb