IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2011 / 30TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17636 of 2011(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JULIE MEENAN, NEELANCHANAM, SRPS, D-7, TC.19/607, SOUTH ROAD, MUDAVANMUGHAL, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, REPRESENTED BY AUTHORISED OFFICER/ ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, CPGP TOWERS, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. BRANCH MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, ANJANA BUILDING, PUTHUPPALLY LANE, MEDICAL COLLEGE BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 011. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.MOHANAN NAIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 17636 of 2011(D) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 01/01/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20/07/2010 IN WP(C) NO. 16928/2010. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE RECEIPT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10/06/2011 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 17636 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 21st day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, initiated by the respondents for recovery of the loan amounts defaulted by the petitioner. The petitioner seeks facility to pay off the amounts due in instalments. 2. The learned counsel for the bank points out that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court and obtained Ext.P3 judgment and, therefore, the petitioner cannot file another writ petition on the same subject matter. 3. I find considerable force in the objection raised by the learned counsel for the bank. If I pass another judgment in this writ petition, that would practically amount to reviewing Ext.P3 judgment on the same question, which I cannot legally do. Having suffered Ext.P3 judgment, the petitioner cannot file another writ petition for the same purpose. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2