IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 27161 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.VIJAYAN @ VIJAYABHANU KAPRAT, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, KAPRAT HOUSE, KAPRATPADI,T HEYYALUNKAL PO NANNAMBRA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, REGIONAL OFFICE NO.4, SIVAGNAM ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI. 2. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.4, SIVAGNAM ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI. 4. M/S. MALABAR EXIM PVT LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI.K.GOPAKUMAR, KAPRAT HOUSE, KAPRATPADI,THEYYALUNKAL PO, NANNAMBRA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. K.GOPAKUMAR, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, KAPRAT HOUSE, KAPRATPADI,THEYYALUNKAL PO, NANNAMBRA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. ANITHA VIJAYAN, W/O.K.VIJAYAN @ VIJAYABHANU KAPRAT, KAPRAT HOUSE, KAPRATPADI,THEYYALUNKAL PO, NANNAMBRA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. (...2/-) WP(C).27161/09-M (2) 7. K.KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, KAPRAT HOUSE, KAPRATPADI,THEYYALUNKAL PO NANNAMBRA VIA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.S.B.PREMACHANDRA PRABHU FOR R2 SRI.S.VINOD BHAT FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).27161/09-M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.30.6.05 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN CC 1742/06 EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.5.8.09 ISSUED BY THE R3 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL OKB //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C).No.27161 OF 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- 1. Petitioner is challenging Ext.P2 notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). Contention of the petitioner is that with respect to sale proceedings against the secured assets in the same loan account, an appeal is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal which is filed against the decision of the recovery officer. But the very same property is now proceeded against, under the SARFAESI Act. According to the petitioner the SARFAESI proceedings now initiated is not maintainable because of pendency of the proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is noticed that the proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal is initiated at the instance of the 7th respondent. Further, learned counsel for the respondent Bank points out that, there is no bar in initiating simultaneous proceedings as held by this court and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which governs the field. 2. However, I am not inclined to interfere with Ext.P2 W.P.(C)27161/09-M 2 because of the fact that Ext.P2 is only a notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner can very well raise objections against the demand made in Ext.P2, raising all contentions including the ground which is raised in this present writ petition. Provisions of the SARFAESI Act mandates that the authorised officer of the Bank to consider such objections if any raised, and to take a decision thereon. Needless to say that the petitioner has got effective alternate remedy by way of appeal against such decision and further proceedings if any taken in this regard. 3. Considering pendency of the writ petition before this court, I am inclined to grant six weeks time from today for the petitioner to raise objections against Ext.P2 notice. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb