IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25360 of 2008(R) -------------------------- CMP.5558/2007 of C.J.M., ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ JAYA BABY, AGED 38, W/O.BABY CHACKO, KORATHARA HOUSE, KANNADI, PULIKUNNU.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MANJU ANTONEY SRI.K.C. SUDHEER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE, RAIBAN SHOPPING COMPLEX, WEST OF MEDICAL COLLEGE JUNCTION, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THOMAS CHACKO, KORLATHARA HOUSE,KANNADY, KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. ANTONY CHACKO, KORATHARA HOUSE, KANNADY, KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. M/S.VEMBANAD MODERN RICE MILLS, BUILDING NO.VIII/239, KANNADY, KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER THOMAS CHACKO. 5. K.A.THOMAS, ANATHANAM HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, UNION SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R7 SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE FOR R1 SMT.P.V.PARVATHI FOR R1 SMT.REENA THOMAS FOR R1 SRI.L.RAM MOHAN FOR R1 SRI.P.V.JYOTHI PRASAD FOR R5 GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.25360 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 29th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The very same proceedings were earlier challenged before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, in S.A.No.14/2008, which was dismissed, by Ext.P7 order, on the ground of limitation. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent bank submits that earlier two writ petitions were also filed in respect of the same subject matter, one by the petitioner himself and the other by his cousin, who claims to be a sharer in the property. In the above circumstances, the petitioner cannot challenge the proceedings again and therefore, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2