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. 7163 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- EDAKKALATHUR CHITTIES & LOANS (P) LTD., 28/673,PALLITHAMAM SHOPPING COMPLEX, ROUND NORTH, THRISSUR-20,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,E.O.LAWRANCE. BY ADV. MR.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. AUTHORIZED OFFICER,UCO BANK,ROUND EAST, THRISSUR. 2. BRANCH MANAGER, UCO BANK,THRISSUR. 3. A.V.FRANCIES, ARAKKAL HOUSE,POOVATHUR, THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR. GEORGE K.VARGHESE, SC , UCO BANK. 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.7163 of 2009-M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT 1.Notice to the third respondent is dispensed with preserving his right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2.The petitioner is a creditor of the third respondent, who is also a debtor of the second respondent bank. The petitioner had obtained an order of attachment before judgment in relation to an item of property of the third respondent. It appears that, that property was security interest in favour of the second respondent bank which initiated action under the SARFAESI Act and the property listed for sale fixing an upset price of Rs.86 lakhs. The petitioner says that if the reserve price is slashed to Rs.50 or 60 lakhs, he would buy the property since the WP(C)7163/2009 -: 2 :- petitioner has amounts due from the third respondent. The amount due to the bank itself is more than Rs.58 lakhs plus interest. Not only that, it is not wise for this Court to exercise writ jurisdiction and fix the reserve price of an item of property. That could be an arbitrary method of fixing the upset price. It is pointed out by the bank that the third respondent debtor had filed writ petition in this Court in relation to the SARFAESI Act proceedings. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek relief in terms of the SARFAESI Act also, and by moving the bank for appropriate adjustments of settlement. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/120309