IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 25343 of 2007(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- JAYANIDHI N., S/O. NARAYANAN ELAYATHU, NARAYANAMANGALAM HOUSE, MEENADOM P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, KOTTIYAM MAIN BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, (AUTHORISED OFFICER). 2. M/S. HERMES ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD. NO.73, HARIMANDIRAM, KAIRALY NAGAR, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.V. SURENDRANATH, SC, SBI R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.JOHN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 25343/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE INVESTMENT PROJECT FOR THE CULTIVATION OF STRAWBERRIES SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE INVOICES AND RECEIPTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF STRAWBERRY SAPLINGS. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY M-AGRO, PUNE DATED 5.3.07. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.12.06 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK DATED 22.03.07. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 5.4.07. EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.6.07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 25343 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.(SARFAESI Act). A notice under Section 13(2) of the Act had been issued to the petitioner, in respect of which the petitioner had already submitted Ext.P7 representation. Petitioner’s grievance in this writ petition is that the Bank is threatening to take possession of the mortgaged property under Section 13(4) of the Act. Petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of this Hon'ble Court directing the 1st respondent to consider Exts.P5 and P8 and reschedule the repayment of the loan taken by the petitioner. ii. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order of this Hon'ble Court calling for the records leading to Ext.P6 and P7 and quash the same.” 2. The petitioner has already filed Ext.P7 reply to the notice Under Section 13(2) of the Act. Therefore, the 1st respondent can WPC : 25343/07 -:2:- take further steps only after issuing a notice under Section 13(4) of the Act after considering Ext.P7. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the notice under Section 13(4), as settled by decision of the Supreme Court, the petitioner’s remedy lies in filing an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided under the Act. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb