IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 29377 of 2010(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- JOSEPH, THAITHARA THEKKETHIL CHERUKOLE PO, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SMT.S.MUMTAZ RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- CORPORATION BANK REP BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER MAVILETHU BUILDING, WARD NO.11 PO CHERUKOLE, MAVILETHU BUILDING ,WARD NO. II PO CHERUKOLE, MAVELIKKARA.PIN- 690 104. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.29377 of 2010-V ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed in repayment of a housing loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank, steps were initiated against the immovable property, which is secured asset. Ext.P2 is the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act. It is stated that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 reply requesting time to make payment of the defaulted amounts and to permit regularisation of the loan account. Grievance of the petitioner is that without acceding to such requests, further steps were initiated and Ext.P4 notice was issued intimating steps taken as provided under Section 13(4) of the Act. 2. Considering availability of the statutory remedy under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, this Court was W.P(C) No.29377 of 2010-V 2 not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, as a gesture of indulgence, when the writ petition came up for consideration, an interim order was issued on 23.9.2010, restraining dispossession of the petitioner from the property, subject to condition of payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/- within two weeks thereafter. The petitioner had filed I.A.No.14019 of 2010 seeking extension of time for compliance of the conditions stipulated. On 13.10.2010 this Court had granted further extension till 20.10.2010. On 1.11.2010 when the matter was taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an amount of Rs.25,000/- was deposited on 26.10.2010 and sought for further time for effecting payment of the balance amount. As a last chance the petitioner was given time for payment of the balance till 12.11.2010. Today when the matter was taken up it is submitted that the petitioner has not complied with condition stipulated, till date. 3. Under the above circumstances, I am not inclined to keep this writ petition pending any further, since the W.P(C) No.29377 of 2010-V 3 issue involved in this writ petition could not be adjudicated in view of the alternate remedy available. 4. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to rights if any available to the petitioner to pursue statutory remedy against further steps, if any initiated by the respondent Bank. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab