IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 29TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3190 of 2011(W) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- A.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE ANDHUNHI, MALLAVARA HOUSE, ADHUR POST, KASARGOD. BY ADVS. SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN SRI.S.K.SAJU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. KASARGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. HEAD OFFICE, KASARGOD, NAYAK'S ROAD, KASARGOD-671121 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE PRESIDENT, KASARGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, KASARGOD, NAYAK'SL ROAD, KASARGOD-671121, KERALA. R1,2 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN,SC,KASARGOD DIST.CO.BAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.3190 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P1 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). According to the petitioner he had submitted Ext.P2 as well as Ext.P4 representations, on receipt of demand raised under Section 13(2). He had also made request for consideration of settlement of the loan account under the 'One Time Settlement scheme', which was allowed in the case of a similar situated person, as evidenced from Ext.P3. Since such requests were not acceded to and since further coercive steps were threatened, this writ petition is filed. 2. Considering the provisions of the statute, I am of the view that the writ petition is highly misconceived and premature. As per Section 13(3A) of the Act, the petitioner is entitled to raise objections or to make representations on W.P.(C).3190/11 -2- receipt of demand under Section 13(2). I further notice that the Bank is at an obligation to consider such objection/ representation and to take a decision thereof, and further to intimate such decision to the petitioner, before proceeding with further steps. Standing counsel for respondent Bank conceded that they have received Ext.P2 letter. 3. Under such circumstances, even if the period stipulated under Section 13(3A) had expired, interest of justice will be served if the respondents are directed to consider Ext.P2 & P4 and to take a decision thereof. 4. Hence the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to take appropriate decision on the basis of Ext.P2 and P4. Needless to say that further steps can be pursued only after intimating such decision to the petitioner. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb