THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO :24704 of 2011 Dated: 28.11.2011 Between: 1. Smt. Srisailapu Kasturi Devi and another. ..Petitioners And The Visakhapatnam Co-operative Bank Limited, Visakhapatnam rep., by its Authorized Officer. ..Respondent This Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD W.P.No.24704 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent-Bank in initiating proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "the Act") and obtaining orders of delivery dated 6.6.2011 from the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam in Crl.M.P.No.577 of 2011 against a dead person i.e., Srisailapu Venkateshwarlu regarding the RCC slabbed house property bearing D.No.31-8-111, situated at Bangarammapeta, Allipuram, Visakhapatnam and the delivery proceedings dated 29.7.2011. On 5.9.2011, this Court while admitting the writ petition granted interim stay of all further proceedings initiated by the respondent-Bank under the Act including sale of the RCC slabbed house property bearing Door No.31-8-111, situated at Bangarammapeta, Allipuram, Visakhpatnam, subject to the condition of the petitioners paying Rs.1,50,000/- within a period of two weeks. Heard both the Counsel and perused the material available on record. According to the respondent-Bank, the husband of the 1st petitioner took loan from the Bank and executed necessary documents in favour of the Bank and thereafter, he became defaulter and hence, the Bank got issued a notice under Section 13(4) of the Act and in spite of the same, no repayment was made and therefore, the Bank filed Crl.M.P. before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam and obtained the orders impugned in this writ petition, whereas it is the case of the 1st petitioner that her husband never borrowed any amount from the respondent-Bank and never executed any documents and the allegations against her husband are baseless and her husband died on 11.2.2006 and the proceedings against dead person are null and void. Under Section 17 of the Act, the petitioners are having an effective statutory remedy to question the proceedings challenged in this writ petition, but without availing such effective and alternative remedy, they filed the present writ petition. In view of the same, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners want to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal for appropriate relief, and therefore, liberty may be granted to them to approach the Tribunal and their interest may also be protected till disposal of the application to be filed before the Tribunal. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with permission to the petitioners to file an application before the Tribunal within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such application being filed, the Tribunal shall dispose of the same within a period of six months thereafter, in accordance with law. Since the petitioners have already deposited Rs.1,50,000/- in pursuance of the orders of this Court, the respondent-Bank shall not take any coercive steps till disposal of such application. No order as to costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA, J Dated: 28.11.2011 ___________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Note: Issue CC in two days B/O Nn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.24704 OF 2011 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) 28.11.2011 Nn