IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2010 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36820 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER:- ------------------ A.P.MOHANAN, PROPRIETOR, M.M.ASSOCIATES, C.S.I.BUILDING, BANK ROAD, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SHERIFF RESPONDENTS:- --------------------- 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, FORT ROAD, KANNUR-670001. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER/CHIEF MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, CHEROOTY ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673001. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.R.S.KALKUR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.36820 of 2010-B. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 15th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking relief in the nature of a direction to the respondents not to take any further action pursuant to Exts.P1 and P3. Ext.P1 as well as Ext.P3 are notices issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) Act. Going by the provisions contained in Section 13 of the Act, the petitioner has got an effective remedy to file objection or any representation, on receipt of demand notice under Section 13(2). 2. According to the petitioner, he had already submitted Ext.P4 reply to the notices which was received by the respondents as evidenced from Ext.P5 postal acknowledgment card. According to the petitioner, respondents have not considered Ext.P4 and no decision is WP(C).No.36820/2010-B. 2 taken thereon, as contemplated under Sec.13(3A). Hence the petitioner seeks interference of this Court to restrain further coercive steps of recovery. 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent bank, on the basis of the instructions, submitted that they have already received Ext.P4 and that no decision has been taken on the request made thereunder. It is pertinent to note that the respondent bank is at an obligation under Sec.13(3A) to take decision on the basis of objections/representations, if any made on receipt of notice under Sec.13(2). Needless to say that the respondent bank shall not initiate further coercive steps for recovery till Ext.P4 representation is considered and a decision is taken thereon and further such decision is intimated to the petitioner. 4. It is made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to invoke statutory remedies provided under Sec.17(1) if he is aggrieved by any further coercive steps on rejecting the WP(C).No.36820/2010-B. 3 representation submitted as per Ext.P4. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of on the basis of the above directions and making it clear that the petitioner will be at liberty to invoke statutory remedies with respect to any further action. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, (Judge) Kvs/-