IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16043 of 2009(A) ------------------------------------- CMP.14186/2008 of C.J.M.,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RAJENDRAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT ARUNALAYAM, KADAPPA, MYNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE: RAMON HOUSE, H.T.PAREKH MARG, 169, BACKBAY RECLAMATION, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI-400 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (SARFAESI ACT) THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE MANAGER, THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., HDFC HOUSE, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (DISTRICT COLLECTOR), COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. BY MR.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 16043 OF 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 18th June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Bank for realisation of the due amount under the loan availed by the petitioner invoking the relevant provisions under the SARFAESI Act. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.1484 of 2009, seeking for similar reliefs and on finding that no interference was to be made, he sought for permission to have the case dismissed as not pressed which invited the verdict dated 13.03.2009. 3. It is also relevant to note that the petitioner, along with his wife, after filing W.P.(C)No.1484 of 2009 and of course during the pendency of the above Writ Petition, had filed yet another case as W.P.(C)No. 5107 0f 2009. The said case was also W.P.(C) No. 16043 OF 2009 2 dismissed as not pressed on the very same day, by the very same learned Judge, as per the verdict dated 13.03.2009. It appears that interference was presumably declined for not revealing the actual facts and circumstances leading to filing of two simultaneous Writ Petitions in respect of the same cause of action. 4. The petitioner has approached this Court now, without referring to the sequence of events so far, particularly as to the filing of W.P(C) Nos.1484 of 2009 and 5107 of 2009 and the outcome resulted by virtue of the judgments passed on 13.03.2009. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had never instructed him about the earlier proceedings and the turn of events and hence was not aware of the same; particularly since the petitioner was being represented by another lawyer in the aforesaid proceedings. 5. The above submission does not impress this Court at all. This is a case where, stringent steps are to be taken against the petitioner for abusing the process of the Court. However, taking note of the persuasive submissions made by the learned Counsel W.P.(C) No. 16043 OF 2009 3 for the petitioner, this Court while declining interference, thinks it fit and proper that the petitioner can be permitted to leave the arena with a nominal cost of Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only). The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with a cost of Rs.5000/-. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk