IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 12506 of 2011(K) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ABDUL KHADER,AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.ISMAIL RAWTHER, PYNUMOOTTIL THEKKETHIL, ATHIKKATTUKULANGARA P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. RABIATH,AGED 47 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL KHADER,PYNUMOOTTIL THEKKETHIL, ATHIKKATTUKULANGARA P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER(AUTHORIZED OFFICER), M/S.FEDERAL BANK LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SREE RAJARAJESWARI BUILDING,CHURCH ROAD, MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA- 688 001. 2. FEDERAL BANK LTD.,CHUNAKKARA BRANCH, CHARUMMOODU P.O,ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 690 505. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE, SMT.P.V.PARVATHI, SMT.REENA THOMAS, SRI.L.RAM MOHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.12506/2011-K: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE DECREE DTD. 19/06/2006 IN O.S. NO. 197/2001 OF SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 27/04/2009 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 26/03/2010 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. EXT.P.4: COPIES OF RECEIPTS DTD. 19/04/2010 AND 17/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE BANK. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 19/05/2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.11519/2010 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 16/04/2011 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 12506 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 7th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of the loan amounts defaulted by the petitioners. The petitioners do not dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The petitioners only seek facility to pay off the amounts in instalments. But I find that the petitioners had earlier approached this Court in respect of the same subject matter and suffered Ext.P5 judgment. If I pass a further judgment, that would amount to reviewing Ext.P5 judgment, which I cannot do under law. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge