IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2011 / 16TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37110 of 2010(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- THOMAS V.A., S/O.ANTONY,AGED 58 YEARS, VALIYAVEETTIL(H),TOMAS VILLA, KOTTAMURI P.O., MALA,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.E.V.MOLY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- SYNDICATE BANK,REGIONAL OFFICE, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM 682 031, REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37110 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- This writ petition is filed challenging the sale proceedings initiated on the basis of Ext.P6 proclamation, in furtherance of steps taken under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). It is noticed that a securitisation application filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal challenging the proceedings is pending and that the said Tribunal had shown indulgence in granting a conditional stay. However, the petitioner failed to comply with the conditions stipulated inspite of various extensions granted by that Tribunal. Still, on the basis of submissions made by the learned counsel that the petitioner is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and that the petitioner will withdraw the securitisation application, indulgence was shown in directing continuation of the interim stay granted by the Tribunal till 5.1.2011, subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.5 W.P.(C).37110/10 -2- lakhs on or before 31.12.2010. The interim order in this regard was issued on 20.12.2010. 2. Today, when the writ petition was taken up for consideration, there was no representation for the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the petitioner has not complied with the condition stipulated by this court. 3. Under the above circumstances, I am of the view that the writ petition need not be entertained any further. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb