IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 3681 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ J. NISHA, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O. A. JAKKEER HUSSAIN, NEDAVELIL BUILDING, 13/84,9G-THOPPIL JUNCTION,UNICHIRA,THRIKKAKARA P.O EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-21. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER (AUTHORIZED OFFICER), STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE, II FLOOR, R.S. BUILDING, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, PALARIVATTOM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 3. A. JAKKEER HUSSAIN, RANI MANZIL, UNICHIRA, INJIPARAMBU ROAD,COCHIN-21, NOW RESIDING AT C/O. MANJU, 2953(28/3602), KULANGARATHARA, 28, ELAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R1,2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 3681 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the wife of a borrower of loan amount from respondents 1 and 2. The 3rd respondent is the borrower. Respondents 1 and 2 have initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 against the security interest. The petitioner also has proceeded against the very same property for amounts due from her husband to her in a matrimonial case in respect of which the Family Court, Ernakulam has issued an attachment order on the same property. The petitioner now submits that if the property is sold in securitization proceedings, she would lose her valuable right and therefore she is prepared to purchase the property from the Bank by private treaty as provided in the Securitization Act and Rules. She seeks a direction to the Bank to sell the property to the petitioner and to issue sale certificate in her favour. 2. Notice has been issued to the 3rd respondent, which was returned unserved with the endorsement that he has left his last known address. Therefore, I directed notice by publication in the news paper which has already been effected. There is no appearance on behalf of the 3rd respondent. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I directed the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 to inform this Court as to what is the upset price they have fixed for the property. Today, it is submitted that upset price fixed is Rs. 22 lakhs. It is also stated that the amount due from the 3rd respondent is around Rs. 14 lakhs. In the above circumstances, I feel that respondents 1 and 2 can be directed to sell the property to the petitioner for the upset price fixed. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. W.P.C. No. 3681/2008. -: 2 :- If the petitioner is prepared to pay the amount of Rs 22 lakhs for the property, the Bank shall sell the same to the petitioner by completing all the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the sale consideration from the petitioner. The sale consideration shall be paid within one month. In case the petitioner does not pay the sale consideration within one month, the Bank can continue proceedings under the Act as now initiated, without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings. I make it clear that in respect of the balance amount due to the 3rd respondent after adjusting the amount under the loan agreement, the petitioner can move the family court to enforce her charge by virtue of the attachment order stated to have been issued by the Family Court. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.