IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 143 of 2008(P) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SMT.UNNIMAYAKUTTY, AGED 63, W/O.KRISHNAN MOOSATH, THENATTU ILLOM, THURAVOOR, CHERTHALA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM) RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. CANERA BANK, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM. 2. CHIEF MANAGER, AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, KOTTAYAM MAIN BRANCH, K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM. 3. TEENU BOBBY, W/O.BOBBY JACOB, PROPRIETRIX, M/S.CHETHIPUZHA ASSOCIATES, II FLOOR, FAZAL BUILDING, PALAI ROAD, ETTUMANOOR, RESIDING AT CHETHIPUZHA HOUSE, AMALAGIRI P.O., KOTTAYAM. 4. BOBBY JACOB, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.CHETHIPUZHA TRADERS, II FLOOR, FAZAL BUILDING, PALAI ROAD, ETTUMANOOR, RESIDING AT CHETHIPUZHA HOUSE, AMALAGIRI P.O., KOTTAYAM. 5. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA, COLLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 6. TAHSILDAR, CHERTHALA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA, CHERTHALA P.O. ALLEPPEY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SIR. I.V.PREMOD BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPINATHA MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ================== W.P(C).No. 143 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 14th day of July, 2008. 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. One of the contentions raised by the petitioner is that, the petitioner has not been served with a possession notice as required under the provisions of the Act. The learned standing counsel for the bank now submits that although the petitioner had infact signed the possession notice as a witness, the bank is prepared to send the possession notice to the petitioner again by registered post. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent bank, not to proceed further with the proceedings except after serving the possession notice on the petitioner. It is agreed by both sides that it will not be required to publish the possession notice again in newspapers. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs