IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35418 of 2008(N) -------------------------- SA.29/2006 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, FEDERAL TOWERS,(8TH FLOOR) MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE SMT.REENA THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. P.V.UKKURU INTERNATIONAL TRADE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR-JOSE UKKURU, XV/6049 T.D.WEST ROAD, KOCHI-682 035. 2. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. 3. DRT-1, CHENNAI. ADV. SRI.P.KESAVAN NAIR FOR R1 SRI.K.G.CLEETUS FOR R1 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R2,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.35418 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed by the Federal bank. The ground for invoking the writ jurisdiction is referable to the absence of the Presiding Officer in the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Kerala & Lakshadweep). Even as of now, there is no Presiding Officer on a regular basis for that institution. It is for the banks to take up this issue with the Central Government since absence of a Presiding Officer in a DRT, where hundreds and thousands are involved in different litigations, is neither in public interest nor is a matter in which the Central Government could sleep over. In a different matter, learned counsel representing the Assistant Solicitor General has mentioned that a person is being appointed. No appointment order has been issued. One does not know as to when would there be an officer to man the DRT (Kerala & Lakshadweep). It is extremely unfortunate that in the present commercial banking scenario, the Central Government is WPC.35418/08 Page numbers sleeping over its duties and responsibilities in the banking sector by taking a snail's pace in the matter of appointment of the Presiding Officer in the DRT (Kerala & Lakshadweep). 2. In so far as the facts of the case in hand is concerned, the bank has a suggestion that it would be better to withdraw the sale proceedings, which are impugned by the private respondents before the DRT, rather than wait for the Tribunal to be manned by a Presiding Officer and to get an adjudication order. The bank would prefer to go for civil proceedings since that would be faster than waiting for an order from the DRT. The civil courts have been replaced by the DRT under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Later, the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 came. Even now, there is not much of any improvement in these sort of proceedings in the banking sector. In such circumstances, the commercial wisdom of the bank to recall the present proposal for sale is only to be appreciated because it has to find its own ways and means to work out its remedies when the statutory WPC.35418/08 Page numbers authorities do not provide any support by way of appropriate adjudication. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is closed, leaving the parties to negotiate and settle the transaction and also for the bank to recall the sale proceedings impugned before the DRT and to proceed for fresh sale if and when necessary. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.