IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 29TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 24846 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M/S.NANDANAM FOOD PRODUCTS, CHERANKAVU, EZHUKONE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, BIJU P.G., S/O. GANGADHARAN RESIDING AT MUKKADAYIL, EDAYAM P.O, VALAKOM, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM ,KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.A.SANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE TAHASILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM,PIN- 691 506. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ARAKKAL VILLAGE, EDAYAM PO, KOTTARAKKARA KOLLAM,PIN- 691 552. 3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER (C&I) STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KOLLAM MAIN BRANCH, BISHOP JEROME NAGAR KOLLAM,PIN- 691 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN R3 BY ADV.SRI.R.S.KALKURA,SC ,SBT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/09/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.24846 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a firm which has availed of loan amounts from the State Bank of Travancore, Kollam Main Branch. The bank has initiated revenue recovery proceedings for recovery of the outstanding loan amounts as also proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), which is under challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner's grievance is that, although the firm itself owns properties, the respondents are proceeding against the individual properties of the partners of the firm. According to them, only if the properties of the firm are not sufficient to cover the loan amount, the respondents shall proceed against the individual properties of the partners. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “i) to call for the records leading to Ext.P5 and P6 from the W.P.(C)No.24846 of 2011 -2- 3rd respondent and issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the Recovery Proceedings of the Cash Credit Facility relating to the partners of the firm including Revenue Recovery and the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents not to proceed against the petitioner and the other partners under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act and Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act for Recovery of the Cash Credit Facility of the firm M/s. Nandanam Food Products without proceeding against the assets of the firm first and wiped off from the liability. iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to first proceed against the asset 15 Cents of property comprised in Sy. No.201/17/2 of Ezhukone Village of the firm M/s. Nandanam Food Products for the Cash Credit Facility and the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act and Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act and till then all further proceedings against the petitioner and the other partners to recover Rs.28,55,503/- Plus interest etc. may be kept in abeyance. iv) to declare that the liability of the petitioner and the other partners to pay the Cash Credit Facility and the proceedings under Revenue Recovery Act and Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act of M/s. Nandanam Food Products will be subject to the proceedings to recover the assets of the firm first and wiped off the liability.” 2. The prayers are opposed by the learned counsel for the Bank who submits that, it is the right of the bank to proceed against all the secured assets. W.P.(C)No.24846 of 2011 -3- 3. Having considered the rival contentions, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: The respondents shall first proceed against the secured assets and only if the proceeds of sale of the secured assets are not sufficient to cover the outstanding loan amounts, they shall proceed against other properties either of the firm or of the partners. I make it clear that, if the secured assets consist of properties of the individual partners that also can be proceeded against. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/