IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 16TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 24636 of 2011(D) -------------------------- CMP.2819/2011 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- PUSHPA LATHA K.S,AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.RAJENDRA KUMAR,PUSHPAVILASAM,ALANGAD, KOTTAPURAM,PARAVUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.SANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE, CORPORATION LTD,K.M.M BUILDING, IST FLOOR,PALARIVATTOM,COCHIN -25, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER,DHFL, K.M.M BUILDING, IST FLOOR,PALARIVATTOM,COCHIN -25. ADV. SRI. C.K. GOVINDAN - GOVT. PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24636 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO PETITIONER ON 2.9.2011 BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED BY THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT ERNAKULAM IN C.M.P NO. 2819/2011 FOR TAKING POSSESSION OF PETITION SCHEDULED PROPERTY. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P(C).NO.19212/2009 (V) DATED 10.08.2009 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P3 SERIES. TRUE COPY OF THE CASH RECIEPTS ISSUED BY THE DHFL (THE RESPONDENTS). EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL DETAILS OF THE PETITIONERS MOTHER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24636 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceeding under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioner to the respondents. But, admittedly the petitioner had earlier approached this Court challenging the same proceedings and suffered Ext.P2 judgment. In view of the same, I cannot pass another judgment contrary to that judgment. Therefore, the remedy of the petitioner lies in filing a petition to review of Ext.P2 judgment. Without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd