IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 17888 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.REGHUNATHAN, T.C. 11/748, KRISHNA BHAVAN, MOSQUE LANE, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.SUSHAMMA REGHUNATHAN, W/O.K.REGHUNATHAN, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. KARNATAKA BANK LTD., P.B.NO.599, MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE - 575 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER & AUTHORISED OFFICER (APPOINTED UNDER THE SERFAESI ACT) KARNATAKA BANK LTD., P.B.NO.599, MAHAVEERA CIRCLE, KANKANADY, MANGALORE - 575 002. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17888 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is challenged in this writ petition. One of the grounds raised is that the respondent Bank is illegally proceeding against an item of property which contains a residential house which was not actually mortgaged in order to secure the loan. It is further contended that another item of property included in the notice issued under Section 13(2) is agricultural land which is exempted from the purview of SARFAESI Act. 2. It is noticed that the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act is only at a stage of issuing notice under Section 13(2). The statute provides remedy for the petitioner to object such demand by raising appropriate W.P.(C).17888/10 -2- contentions. The petitioner has got further remedy by way of appeal as per Section 17 of the Act against coercive steps if any pursued. Considering such effective alternate remedies available, I am not inclined to adjudicate upon the disputed question raised in this writ petition filed under Article 226. 3. Under the above circumstances the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to rights of the petitioners to object Ext.P1 notice and also to seek appellate remedy as provided under the statute. It is made clear that all the contentions raised in this writ petition are left open. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb