IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2010 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP (DRT).No. 884 of 2010(O) --------------------------- (SA.356/2009 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM) ................... PETITIONER -------------------- INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, A BODY CORPORATE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES (ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT, 1970, CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BANKING AND HAVING ITS CENTRAL OFFICE AT CHENNAI AND HAVING ITS BRANCHES ALL OVER INDIA INCLUDING ONE AT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MAIN BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY T.MICAHEL SORANDURAI, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.MR.THINESMUTHU PAUL, CHIEF MANAGER OF THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MAIN BRANCH (AUTHORIZED OFFICER) WHO IS ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEWS RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. SREE VIDHYADHIRAJA VIDYA SAMAJAM, REGISTERED CHARITABLE SOCIETY, HEADQUARTERS AT "ASWATHY", HINDU MISSION ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 695001. 2. P.N.KRISHNA PILLAI, 'SOWPARNIKA', ALUMMOODU, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695121. 3. R.PRABHAKARAN NAIR, 'KRISHNAKRIPA', ASAN NAGAR, EANCHAKKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-8. 4. M/S.ARYANS INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGY, REMYA PLAZA, S.S.KOVIL ROAD, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. OP (DRT).No. 884 of 2010(O) ----------------------------------------- 5. M/S.ZYBERO TECHNOLOGIES, T.C.15/137, ALTHARA ROAD, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, K.JAYAKRISHNAN 695001. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHAN V.NAIR SRI.V.V.MITHUN THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- O.P(DRT) No.884 of 2010-O ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is approaching this Court aggrieved by non disposal of the securitisation application filed by the respondents before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, under Section 17(1) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). 2. It is stated that the respondents 4 and 5 had committed default in repayment of loan availed from the petitioner Bank and the petitioner was constrained to initiate steps under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, against the immovable properties owned by the 1st respondent. Aggrieved by the coercive steps initiated, the 1st respondent had approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal by filing Ext.P1 application under Section 17(1) of the Act (S.A No.356/2009). The said application was filed on 2 O.P(DRT) No.884 of 2010-O 25.6.2009. Thereafter the 1st respondent had moved a petition seeking stay of further proceedings and the Tribunal had issued Ext.P4 interim order granting stay against the proposed sale. The said interim order was issued on 21.9.2010. The petitioner thereupon filed Ext.P5 application seeking an early hearing and disposal of the securitisation application. But it is stated that the case was posted thereafter to 10.12.2010, without considering as to whether the interim order need be modified or not. 3. According to the petitioner, tender was already submitted by a person for purchasing the property which was put to sale and that inordinate delay caused in disposal of the matter will result in withdrawal of the probable buyer. It is further stated that the matter is being delayed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal without hearing and disposal. It is mentioned that the petitioner was ready for hearing on all posting dates but the respondents are causing deliberate delay. The petitioner points out the provisions contained in Section 17(5) of the SARFAESI Act 3 O.P(DRT) No.884 of 2010-O which insists on the Tribunal for disposal of applications received under Section 17(1) within a period of 60 days. Under such circumstances the petitioner seeks directions for an early disposal of S.A.No.356 of 2009 pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. 4. Inspite of notice served on the respondents through Special Messenger deputed from this Court, nobody appeared on their behalf. Taking note of the provisions contained in Section 17(5), I am of the view that it is incumbent on the part of the Tribunal to take earnest efforts for disposal of the matter, at the earliest possible. 5. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the Tribunal to take appropriate steps for an early disposal of the matter. The Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam is directed to take all earnest efforts to consider the securitisation application (S.A.No.356 of 2009) and to dispose of the same, at the earliest possible, and if not possible to dispose of the securitisation application itself to consider and finalise the 4 O.P(DRT) No.884 of 2010-O stay petition upon which Ext.P4 order was granted, at the earliest possible. Orders in this regard may be issued by the Tribunal, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab