IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 27999 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.ARAVINDAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.KORU, RESIDING AT KOONAMKOTTIL HOUSE, MALAVAYAL P.O., WAYANADU DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SRI.A.V.JAMES SRI.P.DALBI EMMANUEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, SULTHAN BATHERY BRANCH, SULTHAN BATHERY P.O., WAYNAD DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SURYA PRABHA, AGED 47 YEARS, D/O.SREEDHARAN, SREE VILASAM HOUSE, KOLERI, POOTHADI AMSOM & DESOM, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR, SC,I.O.BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: shg/ C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 27999 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Challenge in this writ petition is against the proceedings initiated by the respondents under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The writ petition was moved when the immovable property was actually taken over possession by the respondents. By virtue of interim order dated 06.10.2009 this court stayed further proceedings for sale of the immovable property, for a period of one month, on condition of the petitioner remitting an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One lakh fifty thousand only). The petitioner had already complied with the conditions and thereafter the stay was extended. 2. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has got serious contentions regarding maintainability of the proceedings initiated under the W.P.(C)No. 27999 of 2009 -2- SARFAESI Act. I am of the opinion that such contentions can be adjudicated by the appellate forum, which provides an effective remedy under the statute. 3. Having confronted with the above situation learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. He further seeks extension of the interim order for a reasonable period in order to facilitate to approach the appellate authority. 4. Therefore the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to invoke appellate remedy under Section 17 (1) of the SARFAESI Act. The respondents are directed to keep further steps in abeyance for a period of one month from today. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/