IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 38103 of 2010(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- H. HASSAN, S/O.HARRIS, RESIDING AT H.NO.27, ARUMUGHAN GARDEN, CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD-678 007. BY SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.T.C. SURESH MENON, SRI.JIBY P. THOMAS, SRI.P.S. APPU. SRI.NIMOD A.R., SRI.C.A. ANOOP. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, HOME LOANS, PKM BLDG., OPPOSITE MISSION HIGH SCHOOL, PALAKKAD-678 001. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, HDFC HOUSE, NO.29, KAMARAJ ROAD, (NEAR CIRCUIT HOUSE), COIMBATORE-18. 3. MANIKANDAN, S/O.ARUMUGHAN, RESIDING AT PANDARATHODU HOUSE, MANJUKKARA, MANKARA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 613. 4. T.M. HOWA, RESIDING AT VELLAMKUNNIL HOUSE, R.S.ROAD, MANKARA P.O., PALAKKAD- 678 614. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE. MR.A.S. SAJUSH PAUL, SC. R3 BY ADV. MR.K. RAJESH. R4 BY ADV. MR.N.K. SUBRAMANIAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 38103 of 2010(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 26/10/2010. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION DATED 01/11/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(a): COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 38103 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging sale conducted under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act). In view of the effective alternative remedy provided under the statute, this court was not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, on the basis of persuasive submission made to the effect that the 4th respondent is ready and willing to purchase the property on a higher price, indulgence was shown in restraining confirmation of sale, subject to condition of the petitioner or 4th respondent remitting a sum of Rs.1,35,000/-, within two weeks from 7.2.2011. 2. It is conceded that neither the petitioner nor the 4th respondent have made deposit of the amounts as stipulated, till date. Counsel for the 3rd respondent, who is the auction bidder, submits that he had already deposited the entire sale amount and because of pendency of this writ petition he could not enjoy fruits of the auction sale. WP(C).38103/2010 2 3. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition any further for exercising the discretionary jurisdiction vested on this court. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).38103/2010 3