IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 309 of 2011(K) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. P.K.THAMPI, S/O.UTHUPPU KURIAKOSE, PUZHUKALIYIL HOUSE, VAZHAPPILLY, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 2. P.K.UTHUP, S/O.UTHUPPU KURIAKOSE, PUZHUKALIYIL HOUSE, VAZHAPPILLY, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ELIAS RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CATHOLIC SYRAN BANK LTD, ZONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.PIN-682 011 2. THE MANAGER, CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD, MUVATTUPUZHA BRANCH, ERNAKULAM.PIN-686 661 R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOY SRI.R.S.KALKURA,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.309/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 7/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2 COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 14/2/2010 ISSUED BY THE BANK P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26/3/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20/4/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30/12/2010 OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. P6 COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 24/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE BANK. P7 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 9/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A) COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17/02/2010. R1(B) COPY OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT SHOWING THE AMOUNT DUE TO THE RESPONDENT BANK. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 309 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 13rd day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging proceedings initiated by the respondents under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 for recovery of amounts due from the petitioners to the respondents in repayment of loan amounts taken by the petitioners. 2. This court passed the following interim orders in this writ petition” “Standing counsel appearing for the respondent bank is directed to get instructions and to file statement, if so advised. Meanwhile, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the property on the basis of Ext. P5 notice, if not already dispossessed for a period of three weeks, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) on or before 25.1.2011.” 5.1.2011. “It is stated that the stipulations imposed has already been complied with. Standing counsel for respondent bank is directed to file a statement showing the details of accounts. Post after three weeks. Interim stay is extended for a period of three weeks subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a further sum of Rs. two lakhs.” 27.1.2011. I.A. No. 2874/2011 “Extension sought for is opposed by counsel for respondents. However, as a last chance time is extended till 10.3.2011 W.P(C) No. 309 of 2011 -: 2 :- making it clear that no further extension will be granted under any circumstance and on failure the writ petition will be dismissed. Post on 15.3.11. Interim order will continue till then. 28.2.11. “It is submitted that the amount stipulated has already been paid. It is further submitted that an O.A filed by the respondent bank is pending disposal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to consider his request submitted for one time settlement of the account. It is for the respondent bank to take appropriate decision on such request considering the policies adopted in similar matters. However, interim stay is extended for a period of one month, subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a further amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- on or before 8.4.2011.” 15.3.2011. I.A. No. 6880/11 “Time for payment of the amount stipulated is extended till 30.4.11. If amount as stipulated is paid, the interim order will continue till 31.5.11 subject to condition of the petitioner further remitting a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) on or before 25.5.11.” 11.4.11. Counsel for the bank submits that the petitioner has not complied with the directions. It is settled law that proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 have to be challenged in an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided in the statute itself. The Supreme Court has time and again frowned upon the High Courts entertaining writ petitions under Article 226 of the W.P(C) No. 309 of 2011 -: 3 :- Constitution of India against proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security interest Act, 2002 In the above circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/