IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 7TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17304 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.P.MARIYAMMA, W/O.C.C.GEEVARGHESE CHAMBAKKATUKUDIYIL, TRIKKARAIYOOR,KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTER, 40/974, 2ND FLOOR, R.S.BUILDING REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA VYTTILA BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. BIJOY PAUL, THELAKKAT HOUSE, AYAKAD, NEAR THYKAVU CANAL PALAM, AROORPADAM PO, KOTHAMANGALAM. *4. M/S VANTAGE PUBLICATION COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MANIANKOTTU BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR, K.P. VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI (* impleaded as additional 4th respondent as per order dated 31.10.2009 in I.A. 12611/2009) R1 AND R2 BY ADV. MR. K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC R3 MR. THAMPAN THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JJ. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (C) No. 17304 of 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 17th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The admitted pleadings and proceedings in this case would reveal that pursuant to the steps taken by the respondent Bank under the SARFAESI Act for realization of the amount due from the petitioner under a loan transaction, the property over which the security interest was created was subjected to public auction and the same was sold to the 3rd respondent, who is the successful bidder. The course and proceedings pursued by the Bank is stated as in conformity with the statutory requirements and sought to be sustained by filing a counter affidavit. The third respondent has also filed a counter affidavit as to the right to have the property, stating that he has already satisfied the entire sale consideration. In the above circumstances, it is for the petitioner to challenge the sale, if aggrieved in any manner by adducing evidence in support of his contentions by approaching the appropriate authority, as provided under the relevant provisions of law. Interference is declined and the petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner as above. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd