IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2008 / 27TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24525 of 2008(T) -------------------------- SA.82/2008 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ ROSY PAUL, W/O.PAULY ANTONY VIII/568, KALATHIPARAMBIL, CHUNANGUMVELY ERUMATHALA PO., ALUVA-683112. BY ADV. SRI.N.SASI SMT.SREEKALA A. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI. 2. DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, 5TH FLOOR KSHB, BUILDING, PANAMPALLY NAGAR ERNAKULAM. 3. STATE BANK OF INDIA, SARC, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.LESLIE STEPHEN, CGC FOR R1 & 2 R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.24525 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner stood as a surety for a cash-credit facility availed from the third respondent Bank. The debt was not discharged and that led to proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. She filed a securitisation appeal as S.A.No.82/08 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which is pending. I may notice that even before that, the petitioner and the principal debtor, i.e., husband of the petitioner, had filed W.P(C).9207/08 leading to Ext.P2 judgment, which was issued noticing that the petitioner did not dispute the liability, but was only seeking certain instalment facility to discharge the outstandings. 2. This writ petition is filed stating that the petitioner is confident of succeeding in S.A.No.82/08 before the DRT, however, the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal had retired from service and the Bank has proceeded to take physical possession of the property. With the aforesaid in view, it is beyond dispute WPC.24525/08 Page numbers that there is no jurisdictional error or legal infirmity in the impugned proceedings. 3. Learned counsel for the Bank submits, on instructions, that the request of the petitioner to defer actual dispossession by a couple of two months could be considered, provided, any private sale that the petitioner would pursue is worked out with the concurrence of the Bank and the entire outstandings paid into the Bank account and also that the petitioner gives up her right to prosecute S.A.No.82/08. This is agreed to by the petitioner through her learned counsel. Recording the above submissions, this writ petition is ordered directing that all further action on the basis of Ext.P1 notice will stand deferred for a period of two months to enable the petitioner to work out any private sale as stated above. On production of a copy of this judgment, by the Bank, the DRT will close S.A.No.82/08, on the basis of what is recorded herein. It is further ordered that the petitioner shall file an affidavit before WPC.24525/08 Page numbers the Bank within a period of one week from today that if no sale as aforesaid is materialised, she shall surrender the security property to the authorised officer without any further dispute. If such surrender is not effected, the Bank will be at liberty to forthwith take physical possession and further proceed in terms of the SARFAESI Act. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.18/8.