IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2009 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6828 of 2009(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, T.C.35/106, VALSA MANDIRAM, VETTAMUKKU, THIRUMALA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. MR.SANTHAN V.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (FINANCE-BANKING), MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KERALA CIRCLE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER (ADVANCES), STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE (ASSOCIATE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA) VAZHUTHACAUD BRANCH, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, VAZHUTHACAUD BRANCH, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. VALSALA MADHU, B-2-1, NO.37, VIJI FLAT, PINJALA SUBRAHMANYAM STREET, T.NAGAR,CHENNAI. 6. THE REGISTRAR, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP), MANORAMA JN.,ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL BY ADV. MR. SAJI VARGHESE, SC FOR SBT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.6828 of 2009-W = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner stood relegated from this Court to the DRT on his challenge to certain securitisation proceedings. Ext.P12 shows that the securitisation application filed by the petitioner has been returned defective on different grounds. One of the reasons stated in Ext.P12 is that it is not shown that measure under Section 13(4) has been taken to dispossess the applicant. If the petitioner has a case that steps have been taken under Section 13(4), that has to be brought to the notice of the DRT. Even if the endorsement and the stand taken by the Registrar of the DRT is wrong, the petitioner can bring up the matter before the Presiding Officer of the DRT. It is not for this Court to set the board of the DRT right. Therefore, it is ordered WP(C)6828/2009 -: 2 :- that on re-presentation of the securitisation application of the petitioner as evidenced by Ext.P12, the Registrar of the DRT will look into whether the same continues to be defective and if so, list the matter before the Presiding Officer of the DRT to hear the petitioner on the alleged defects. All other questions are left open. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/120309