IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2009 / 14TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3478 of 2009(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SANDHYAKUMARI, CHAPRAYIL HOUSE, PUNNAMMODU P.O. MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINCENT JOSEPH SRI.A.V.CHARLES RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MAVELIKKARA MAIN BRANCH, B.M.C. COMPLEX, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MAVELIKKARA MAIN BRANCH, B.M.C. COMPLEX, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. SREEDHARAN M.N. CHAPRAYIL HOUSE, PUNNAMMODU P.O. R1, R2 BY ADV.SRI.SAJI VARGHESE, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.3478 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner challenges a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. She tries to demonstrate a contradiction between the impugned Ext.P3 notice and the contents of Ext.P1. I do not want to say anything on merits because the petitioner is entitled to file objections to a notice under Section 13(2), though cannot insist on a judicial review on the decision of the bank on that because of the provisions under the SARFAESI Act which do not provide such a review. This is laid down by the Apex Court in Mardia Chemicals Ltd. & Others v. Union of India & Others {2004 (4) SCC 311}. As of now, no measure has been taken under Section 13(4). Even in such circumstance, the petitioner can move the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. I would have directed the bank to consider the objections of the petitioner and also the request for regularising the home loan but the petitioner states, through learned counsel, that she is unable WPC.3478/09 Page numbers to pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, which, I deem to be a fair amount for even telling the bank to consider regularising the home loan, since, a rough calculation on the submissions made by the petitioner itself would show that total equated monthly instalments that have defaulted and the accruals thereon would be now around Rs.3,50,000/- to Rs.3,75,000/-. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed without any orders. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.