IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 31ST BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 29001 of 2010(A) -------------------------- CMP.4702/2010 of C.J.M.,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.C.ANTONY, S/O.CHACKO, PROP. VIMALA PRESS, THARAYIL HOUSE, NEDUPUZHA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, THRISSUR MAIN BRANCH, REP. BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER-CHIEF MANAGER, STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE, GEETHANJALI BUILDINGS, PARAMEKKAVU, THRISSUR- 680 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN - SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No.29001 of 2010-A ---------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P6 proceedings pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur, and also seeking direction against the second respondent to abide by Ext.P5 order through which the Government had granted instalment facility to the petitioner. The matter arises with respect to the proceedings initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Consequent to default committed by the petitioner in repaying a loan availed from the respondent Bank, immovable property, which is secured asset with respect to the loan transaction, was proceeded against. The petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion in W.P(C) No.21066 of 2010. The said writ petition was filed at a stage when the proceedings was initiated before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. At that time the petitioner had submitted before this Court that he is not pressing any grounds raised against the proceedings, but only praying for W.P(C) No.29001 of 2010-A 2 some more time to clear the entire liability. Submission made at that time was only to the effect that, the petitioner needs only two more months, till 31.10.2010, for clearing the arrears. It was also undertaken before this Court that the petitioner does not intend to avail any statutory remedy as provided under Section 17 of the Act. Taking note of such submissions, indulgence was shown by this Court in permitting the petitioner to clear the liability on or before 31.10.2010. The petitioner was directed to make payment of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on or before 31.8.2010. It was made clear that if he fails to satisfy the said condition, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is raising challenge against the very same proceedings, which was impugned in W.P(C) No.21066 of 2010, on the basis of Ext.P5 order. It is evident from Ext.P5 that the State Government had issued orders permitting instalment payment, with respect to revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner. It is revealed that at the behest of the respondent Bank, revenue recovery steps were also initiated and Ext.P4 notice was issued under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. In W.P(C) No.29001 of 2010-A 3 Ext.P5 it is mentioned that if the petitioner remits 10% of the arrears before 30.10.2010, the balance payment can be allowed in 50 instalments. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent Bank points out that the very same revenue recovery proceedings was a subject matter of challenge in an earlier writ petition also. However, it is trite law that initiation of proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act for realising the arrears under the loan account is not a bar for proceeding under the SARFAESI Act in case the loan is secured through mortgage of any properties. Section 37 of the SARFAESI Act makes it clear that the provisions of that Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of many other laws. 4. Under the above circumstances, I find no reason to withhold the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act on the ground that, instalment facility has been allowed by the Government against the recovery steps initiated under the provisions of Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Further, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner had failed to comply with the conditions incorporated in the earlier judgment. Having failed to comply with the stipulations contained W.P(C) No.29001 of 2010-A 4 in the earlier judgment, in which an equitable relief was granted by this Court, it is highly improper on the part of the petitioner to file another writ petition for invoking jurisdiction of this Court. Under the above circumstances, the writ petition is devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab