IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2009 / 28TH SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 757 of 2009(C) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.35304/2008 Dated 28/01/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. ROSAMMA KURIYAKOSE, W/O.LATE V.V.KURIYAKOSE @ KURIYACHAN, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.365, POOTHADI PANCHAYATH, WARD -14, KENICHIRA P.O.,SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673596. 2. JOHNY KURIYAKOSE,S/O.LATE V.V.KURIYAKOSE @ KURIYACHAN,VAZHAYIL HOUSE,HOUSE NO.365, POOTHADI PANCHAYATH, WARD -14,KENICHIRA P.O. SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673 596. 3. V.K.VARKEY, S/O.LATE V.V.KURIYAKOSE, @ KURIYACHA, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.365, POOTHADI PANCHAYATH, WARD - 14,KENICHIRA P.O. SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673 596. 4. LAILA KURIYAKOSE,D/O.LATE V.V.KURIYAKOSE @ KURIYACHAN, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.365, POOTHADI PANCHAYATH, WARD 14, KENICHIRA P.O. SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673 596. BY ADV. SRI.E.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH, SC THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. `````````````````````````````````````````````````````` R.P. No. 757 of 2009 in W.P.(C) No. 35304 OF 2008 C `````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 19th day of August, 2009. O R D E R This review petition is filed by the heirs of the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed challenging proceedings initiated under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The parties were relegated to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, since the contentions revolved on the correctness or otherwise of the demand of the bank and the measure taken by the bank under that Act. This review petition is filed on the contention that the DRT does not have jurisdiction to deal with an order passed by the CJM under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and that, therefore, this court ought not have refused jurisdiction. There is no doubt, even going by the submissions on behalf of the bank before me today, that proceedings before the CJM under section 14 and any dispossession of any delivery etc. by the enforcement of the police power of the State under section 14 of the Act will necessarily depend upon any interlocutory or final order that the DRT may RP.757/09 : 2 : pass on the application or appeal against the measure taken by the bank. All that remains is the submission on behalf of the petitioners that the bank has proceeded to sell the property. That again is a measure under the Act and is one that could lead only to a further matter before the DRT under section 17 of the Act. For the aforesaid, this review petition is dismissed, however, clarifying that the enforcement proceedings before the CJM will be dependent on any order that the DRT may pass. Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. to Judge