IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2008 / 13TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21768 of 2008(N) -------------------------------------- OA.211/2002 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------ P.K.RAMANKUTTY, AGED 83 YEARS S/O. KUNJHU,PLAVALLAPPIL HOUSE MULLURKKARA P.O., THRISSUR 680 583 (MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.CLASSIC BLOW TECHNIQUES, MULLURKKARA P.O.,THRISSUR 680 583) BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. CANARA BANK, S.S.I. BRANCH ATHANI, THRISSUR- 683 585 2. RECOVERY OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM 3. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 033 4. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK CIRCLE OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.GOPINATH MENON FOR R1, R4 ADV. SRI.V.B.UNNIRAJ, SC, KFC FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.21768 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges the notice of demand and the notice for settling sale proclamation issued in January, 2008 and May, 2008 respectively, under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks & Financial Institutions Act, 1993. The primary contention is that the Task Force Committee on Sick Unit Rehabilitation programme had been considering the case of four establishments in relation to the petitioner, for rehabilitation. A perusal of Ext.P6 minutes of the meeting dated 11.7.2007 would, however, show that when the Canara Bank took the stand that the four units have been given notice under the SARFAESI Act, the request of the units was only for an additional time of six months for settling the liabilities. From that date, more than one year has gone through by now. Therefore, there will be no justification for this Court to interfere with Exts.P1 and P2 proceedings. Yet, Ext.P8 is a communication issued by the General Manager of the District Industries Centre to the Deputy WPC.21768/08 Page numbers General Manager, Canara Bank, the 4th respondent herein. Being a nationalised bank, the 4th respondent is duty bound to consider Ext.P8 and place its decision before the General Manager, who is dealing with processing of the request of the four establishments to be brought under the Sick Units Rehabilitation Programme. Hence, without prejudice to contentions, the 4th respondent is directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P8 and communicate the decision thereon to the General Manager, DIC, Thrissur within an outer limit of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any sale is taking place in the mean while, the same shall not be confirmed until a decision is communicated, as directed above. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.5/8.