IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 9606 of 2011(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.R. LALU, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN, KOLLAMPARAMBIL, MADUKKA. P.O, PANACKACHIRA, MUNDAKAYAM (VIA), KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. MEENACHIL EAST URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.4266, POONJAR THEKKEKARA, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 686 581. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, MEENACHIL EAST URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.4226, MUNDAKAYAM BRANCH, MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM-686 513. 3. THE CHIEF ACCOUNTANT (AUTHORIZED OFFICER), MEENACHIL EAST URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.4266, POONJAR, THEKKEKARA, KOTTAYAM-686 001. R1 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 9606 of 2011(A) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 04/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERUMELY VADAKKU. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11/11/2010. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18/02/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 9606 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). This court passed an interim order on 25.03.2011. The petitioner did not pay the said amount. Therefore this Court passed a further order on 12.04.2011. The counsel for the petitioner is unable to tell me whether the interim order has been complied with. The Bank also does not have any information regarding payment. It is settled law that this court shall not ordinarily interfere with the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the parties should be relegated to the remedy by way of an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided under the Act. In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner W.P.(C)No. 9606 of 2011 -2- especially since the petitioner has not complied with the interim order of this Court. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/