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. 32980 of 2010(V) -------------------------- CMP.1512/2010 of C.J.M.,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONERS: ------------------- SANTHOSH SIVADASAN, S/O.N.SIVADASAN, AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT AVITTOM, T.C.27/2185, CHIRAKKULAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR SRI.ABHIJETT LESSLI RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, T.C.11/36, SAI KRISHNA BUILDING, PMG JUNCTION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. INDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., CORPORATE OFFICE AT INDIA BULLS HOUSE, UDYOG VIHAR, PHASE-V, GURGAON, HARYANA-122001, HAVING BRANCH AT T.C.11/36, SAI KRISHNA BUILDING, PMG JUNCTION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J ------------------------------ WP(C) NO. 32980 OF 2010 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Challenge in this Writ Petition is against the steps initiated under the provisions of the Securitisaiton and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The matter is pending consideration before the Chief Judicial Magisrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, pursuant to steps invoked by the respondent Bank under Section 14(1) of the Act. 2. Eventhough interference on merits was not proper, by way of indulgence, this Court granted an interim stay against dispossession of the petitioner from the property, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.30 lakhs within two weeks from 29.10.2010. It is submitted that the petitioner has not remitted the amount as stipulated. 2 WP(C) No. 32980/2010 3. Today when the Writ Petition came up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the Writ Petition on the premise that he will work out his remedies before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court had already issued an order on 30.09.2010 by appointing an Advocate Commissioner to take over possession of the property and on that premise he seeks permission to pursue further remedies as contemplated under the SARFAESI Act. 4. However, considering the request, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. It is made clear that the respondent Bank is at liberty to pursue further remedies. It is further made clear that dismissal of this Writ Petition will not restrain rights if any available to the petitioner to pursue remedies before the statutory authorities. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE dnc