IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3390 of 2009(C) ------------------------- CMP.6115/2008 of C.J.M., ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- INDIRA CHANDRA MOHAN, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O. CHANDR MOHAN, HOUSE WIFE, CHANIYIL PUTHAN VEEDU, THURVOOR P.O., PADINJATTUMKARA THAKKUM MURI, THURUVOOR VILLAGE, CHARTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN JUDE ISSAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SREEKUMAR MENON, AGED ABOUT 42 S/O. RAJAN MENON, BUSINESS 7D MANGALA TOWERS, MANNLA P.O., VANNALA DESOM, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. IND SREEKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 34 D/O. RAVINDRAN NAIR, KORATHATTU HOUSE, THRIPUNITHURA PO NADAMA DESOM, NADAMA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 30, NOW RESIDING AT 7D MANGALA TOWERS, VANNALA P.O., VANNALA DESOM, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, EKM DIS 3. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.S.DILIP, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.3390 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is facing proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. According to her, she executed a power of attorney in favour of the first respondent, who is not related to her. He, in turn, sold the property of the petitioner to the second respondent, who is the wife of the first respondent. Learned counsel for the bank states that the second respondent has again alienated that property. SARFAESI proceedings are taken on the basis of a housing loan and a Suvidha loan. The petitioner has filed Ext.P1 suit in 2008 before the Sub Court, Cherthala against the respondents herein. I do not find that the writ jurisdiction needs to be invoked to grant any relief on the disputed question of right to property. The writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to contentions before other forum. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.