IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2011/6TH ASHADAH 1933 OPDRT.No. 810 of 2011 (O) ------------------------- SA.39/2010 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER: ------------- K. VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.P.K. VASUDEVAN NAIR PERUMPANAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MATTAKKARA.P.O, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM) RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, KOTTAYAM MAIN BRANCH THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE SARC (STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE) KOTTAYAM - 686002. R,R1-2 BY SRI.K.S.DILIP THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-06-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: OPDRT.No. 810 of 2011 (O) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.25.6.2010 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DTD.18.1.2010 IN I.A.NO.164/2010 IN S.A.NO.30/2010 EXT.P3: COPY OF THE D.D. DTD.18.2.2010 BEARING NO.551876 FOR RS.25,000/- EXT.P4: COPY OF THE D.D. DTD.18.2.2010 BEARING NO.177751 FOR RS.25,000/- EXT.P5: COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT WITH ROUGH SKETCH DTD.19.7.2010 EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ONE TIME SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL DTD.8.12.2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE ab C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J ---------------------------------------------------- O.P (DRT) No.810 of 2011-O ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is approaching this Court seeking declaration to the effect that the proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is not sustainable, in view of the fact that the security interest is created on an 'agricultural land', which is exempted under the purview of Section 31 of the said Act. It is noticed that an application filed by the petitioner under Section 17(1) of the Act is pending disposal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. It is also noticed that the petitioner had failed to comply with the conditions stipulated by the Tribunal, for payment of a sum of Rs.2 lakhs. However, it is mentioned that the petitioner had effected payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/- when the matter is pending before the Tribunal. O.P (DRT) No.810 of 2011-O : 2 : 2. When the writ petition came up for admission, this Court directed the dispossession to be kept in abeyance, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.2 lakhs. It is reported that the amount has already been remitted. Eventhough a further condition was imposed for remittance of additional amounts, the petitioner has not complied with such condition. It is stated that he could deposit only a sum of Rs.25,000/-. 3. However, since the matter is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, it is for the petitioner to pursue remedies before that Tribunal. If the petitioner approaches the Tribunal seeking appropriate interim relief in view of the remittances already made, it is for the Tribunal to decide whether any interim relief can be granted in the matter, till the disposal of the Securitisation Application. It is also necessary for the Tribunal to consider and dispose of the Securitisation Application at the earliest possible, in view of the limitations prescribed under Section 17(5) of the SARFAESI Act. O.P (DRT) No.810 of 2011-O : 3 : 4. Under the above mentioned circumstances the writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy from the Debt Recovery Tribunal. However, considering the remittances already made, coercive steps for dispossession is directed to be kept in abeyance for a period of three months from today, in order to facilitate the petitioner to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal and to facilitate the Tribunal to dispose of the Securitisation Application, within the said time. 5. Needless to say that, if the application could not be disposed of within the said time, the Tribunal shall consider the request if any made by the petitioner for interim relief. The Original Petition is disposed of with the above observations. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab //True Copy//