IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10416 of 2009(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ICY JOSEPH, W/O.JOSEPH, KARUKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUNNAPPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.GEORGE SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, NH 47 BRANCH, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. LISSY, W/O.HARIPRIYAN, NANDANAM, SANATHANPURAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA. R1 & R2 BY MR. P.V. SURENDRANATH, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.10416 of 2009-V = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a creditor of the third respondent, who had availed a loan from the second respondent bank. The security interest created by the third respondent in favour of the bank is in relation to two items of properties. The petitioner has an order of attachment over an item of property which was notified by the bank for sale. The petitioner moved this Court earlier complaining that the upset price fixed is low and that if private sale is permitted, funds could be generated to satisfy both the debts. While the outstandings due to the petitioner is around Rs.4 lakhs, the amount due to the bank is nearly Rs.65 lakhs. As per Ext.P5 judgment, this Court held that though the issue regarding the fixation of upset price etc. cannot be gone into by this WP(C)10416/09 -: 2 :- Court, if the petitioner generates any fund in excess of what is due by recourse to sale, that would be retained by it subject to any orders that may be passed by the attaching court. This writ petition is filed for a relief that the bank should sell the property by inviting tenders and not by any private treaty. The submission of the bank is that the property has already been sold and certificate of sale has been issued and registered. The SARFAESI Act provides for sale by publication, as also by private treaty. It is not even necessary for this Court to step in at the instance of a creditor with total recoverables fixed at Rs.4 lakhs, particularly when if any person is aggrieved by the sale, alternate statutory remedies are available. The writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/060409