IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18275 of 2010(H) -------------------------- CMP.5436/2009 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOHN KENNADI, S/O.SELVAMANI, SONIYA BHAVAN, KAPPIVILA, KOLLAMKODU.P.O, ANTHIYOORKONAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. I.C.I.C.I.BANK LIMITED, LAND MARK, RACE COURCE CIRCLE, VADODARA, HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT FELICITY SQUARE, OPPOSITE A.G'S OFFICE, NEAR STATUE, M.G.ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, SHAILESH YADAV. 2. SUSHEELA.G, VIJI VIHAR, M.P.V/150, ANTHIYOORKONAM, KOLLODU.P.O, MALAYINKEEZHU, NEAR R.C.CHURCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 029. 3. SIBI.K, VIJI VIHAR, M.P.V/150, ANTHIYOORKONAM, KOLLODU.P.O, MALAYINKEEZHU, NEAR R.C.CHURCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY, SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH, SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN, SRI.V.R.REKESH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 18275 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is a stranger to the loan transaction has approached this Court because of the coercive steps taken by the 1st respondent Bank for causing possession of the property over which the security interest has been created by the respondents 2 and 3 while availing a loan. 2. The factual possession as given in the Writ Petition is that, the respondents 2 and 3 had availed a loan from the 1st respondent Bank, creating security interest over the property in question. But since the repayment was not effected on time, the Bank proceeded with steps under the SARFAESI Act; pursuant to which the physical possession of the property was taken over. 3. The petitioner, who is residing nearby, does not have proper access to his property, to take the vehicle bearing No. KL 01 AK 2678 (TATA ACE CLB) owned by the petitioner and hence he used to keep the vehicle in the court yard of the respondents 2 and 3, with their permission. But in the course of the steps taken by the respondent Bank for taking the physical possession of the secured assets, the above vehicle of the petitioner which was lying parked in the court yard of the respondents 2 2 WP(C) No. 18275/2010 and 3 was also wrongly taken into custody. Despite filing a petition before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for causing the release of the vehicle, it has not turned to be fruitful as borne by Ext.P4; which made the petitioner to approach this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents do not have any right or interest with regard to the vehicle and that it does not form a property over which the security interest has been created by anybody. 5. The learned standing counsel for the Bank submits on instructions that the possession of the vehicle was taken over due to some confusion and mistake; simultaneously adding that the Bank does not have any objection to cause the vehicle to be released. It is also stated that the vehicle is still in the courtyard, where it was left by the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that necessary arrangements will be made to cause the vehicle to be handed over to the petitioner forthwith, at any rate, within two days. In view of the above submission, no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is closed, recording the undertaking given by the 1st respondent Bank. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc