IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9356 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.NAZAR, S/O.MAMMU, AGED 47 YEARS, KINAKKOOL HOUSE, P.O.IRIKKOOR, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, KANNUR BRANCH, FORT ROAD, KANNUR, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI. R2 & R3 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.S.G, R1 BY SRI. A.S.P KURUP, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.9356 of 2008-L = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.In view of the fact that the petitioner had approached this Court on two earlier occasions and obtained judgments granting relief by permitting him to pay certain instalments and having thereafter approached the Division Bench and the Division Bench having given permission to withdraw the writ petition, the petitioner cannot have a merry-go-round and a musical chair again by scouting different fora and still trying to sustain this writ petition for further relief on the plea that the DRT has only issued a notice on an application to condone delay in filing a securitization appeal. The sale, as of now, stands posted to 24-3-2008 and the only plea that is raised is that the petitioner will be able to WP(C)9356/2008 -: 2 :- find out a private purchaser. Even if that be so, such private purchaser can also participate in the auction on 24-3-2008 and make remittances within the statutory frame work available under the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act. I do not find any ground to extend the visitorial jurisdiction of this Court in favour of the petitioner. The writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/