IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 24718 of 2011(L) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- DR.SIRAJ.A, RUDRAVEENA,T.C.29/75(7), MEPPALLY GARDEN,MGRA 34, PALKULANGARA,PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.RAJU JOSEPH, SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KARNATAKA BANK LTD, THAKARAPARAMBU ROAD, FORT.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023. REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR BRANCH MANAGER. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, KARNATAKA BANK LTD, ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, # 105,III,FLOOR,MOHAN MANSION, KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.LEO GEORGE SRI.K.N.SASIDHARAN NAIR SMT.BABITHA THAMBI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AV WPC.NO.24718/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT-P1: COPY OF THE VALUATION OF THE BUILDING AND THE LAND BELONG TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P2: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P3: COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 16.5.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1.8.2011 EXHIBIT-P5: COPY OF THE REPLAY DATED 11.8.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P6: COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE THIS APPEARED IN HINDU DAILY DATED 25.8.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE AV S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24718 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act initiated by the respondents for recovery of loan amounts due from the petitioner to the respondents. 2. After hearing both sides, I passed the following interim order on 23.9.2011: “There would be an interim order as follows: The 1st respondent shall take and communicate to the petitioner a decision on the application for one time settlement filed by the petitioner within two weeks. The sale posted on 29/9/2011 shall be adjourned by 1 ½ months on the petitioner paying an amount of Rs.25 lakhs within that time. The petitioner shall also bring a buyer for the property and implead him this writ petition within that time. Post on 14.11.2011.” 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the conditions in the interim order have not been complied with. Therefore, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary W.P.(C)No.24718/11 2 jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner. Even otherwise, the Supreme Court has time and again cautioned High Courts against entertaining writ petitions challenging proceedings under the Act. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.24718/11 3