IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25641 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SALEENA BEEVI, AGED 35 YEARS, D/O.HASSANKUTTY RAWTHER, RESIDING AT CHAITHRAM, KADAKKAD MURI, KURAMPALA VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, HEAD OFFICE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, THE STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, PADINJARAKKARA CHAMBERS, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, PANDALAM BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, KURAMPALA, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MATHEW VADAKKEL. ADV. SRI. R.S. KALKURA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 25641 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 14th October, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the coercive action taken against the properties belonging to the petitioner comprised of 6.20 ares of property in Sy. No. 346/2/1 in Block No. 3 of Kurampala Village, Adoor Taluk, Pathanamthitta District by the respondents 1 to 3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is not a defaulter of loan amounts due to the 1st respondent and the petitioner has not mortgaged the said property in favour of the bank also. 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the brother-in-law of the petitioner borrowed money from the bank, for repayment of which the petitioner's father and mother were guarantors. On the death of the petitioner's father, proceedings have been initiated against the properties of the father, which is the security interest, under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It is further submitted that proceedings under the Securitisation Act is not against the property in Sy. No. 346/2/1, but against the property in Sy. No. 346/2, which belonged to the petitioner's father. 3. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said submission may be recorded and the writ petition may be closed. 4. Accordingly, the above submission made by respondents 1 to 3 is recorded and the writ petition is closed. If the petitioner offers to pay tax in respect of the property in W.P.C. No. 25641/09 -: 2 :- Sy. No. 346/2/1, respondents 4 and 5 shall accept the same. However, acceptance of tax by respondents 4 and 5 would not in any way operate as estoppel against them for further proceedings against the property, if found necessary later on. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.