IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2007 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 34707 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, 'SREE LAKSHMI', PRIYADARSHINI NAGAR, KOTTUKAL P.O. BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. S.S.BINDU, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.SAROJINI.P 'SREE LAKSHMI', PRIYADARSHINI NAGAR, KOTTUKAL PO, BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NISHIN GEORGE VIJAYABABU SMT.ANNAMMA PHILIP SRI.BIJU JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CANARA BANK, ANCHAMADA BRANCH, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, R & L SECTION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. P.S.ANIL KUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, SUMATHI BHAVAN, KUNDAMAN BHAGAM, PEYAD P.O., VILAPPILASALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. AJITH KUMAR, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NADAR, KURUVITHOTTAM VEEDU, KOTTUKAL P.O NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY S.C.SRI.P.GOPINATHAMENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 34707of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2007 JUDGMENT Though prayer in this writ petition is to set aside the proceedings under the Securitisation Act, the only contention urged is that the property could have fetched a better price than what was fetched. Learned standing counsel for the bank submits that the sale has been confirmed accepting the best offer. Apart from the alleged unsatisfactory price, the petitioner has not urged any ground to interfere with the above proceedings. If the bank has fixed the sale accepting the best offer that was received, the sale conducted cannot be faulted. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the above proceedings. 2. Hence, the writ petition fails and it stands dismissed. Antony Dominic, Judge. mn.