IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 14TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27127 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VISWAMBARAN, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O VELU, SASTHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANGALAM DESOM, MULAVUKAD VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.DANIEL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, BROADWAY BRANCH, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, BROADWAY BRANCH, ERNAKULAM. 3. M/S ABHIJITH HARDWARDS, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, S.V. LALAN, ELIAS, CHAMBERS, MARKET ROAD, KOCHI -35, RESIDING AT SASTHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONNARIMANAGLAM DESOM, MULAVUKAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.S. DILIP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 27127 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 5th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 . He seeks time to pay the amounts. This is stoutly opposed by the standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2. He points out that earlier, the petitioner's son had approached this Court challenging the very same proceedings in which this Court had permitted payment in instalments. The same has not been complied with, is the contention raised. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, that is not binding on the petitioner in so far as the petitioner's right in the security interest is under threat. 2. I am exercising discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has no case that he and his son are estranged. That being so, after the son having approached this Court and obtained orders, thereafter, the father cannot come with another writ petition for the same purpose. In any event, it is settled law that proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 has to be challenged before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as per the provisions of the Act itself, In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.