IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 28130 of 2010(M) ------------------------ PETITIONER : ----------------- AFSAL V.U., AGED 30, S/O.USMAN, PROPRIETOR, M/S.ROYALTENS TRADING RESIDING AT VALLEPPILLY HOUSE, EDAPPALLY TOLL, COCHIN - 24. BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. INDIAN BANK, REP. BY THE CHIEF MANAGER, INDIAN BANK, CIRCLE OFFICE, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 018. 2. MANAGER, INDIAN BANK, EDAPALLY BRANCH - 682 024. 3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, INDIAN BANK, CIRCLE OFFICE, PULLEPADY JUNCTION, CHITTOOR ROAD, EDAPALLY - 682 018. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI. S. EASWARAN, SC, INDIAN BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/09/2010, ALONG WITH WP(C) NO. 28131/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J ----------------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.28130/2010 & 28131/2010 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the proprietor of two firms M/s.Royaltens Trading and M/s.Atlas Traders. The firms had availed cheque purchase facility from the second respondent Bank to the tune of Rs.18,00,000/- in the former case and Rs.15,00,000/- in the later. In order to secure the advances the petitioner had hypothecated the stock in trade as well as mortgaged certain immovable properties. Since there was default in repayment of the amounts availed, the respondent had approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal by filing O.A.No.239 of 2010 and 238 of 2010 respectively. Grievance of the petitioner is that during pendency of the matter before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the respondent has initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and immovable properties which are the secured assets are now being proceeded against. Ext.P1 in both the cases are notices issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. W.P(C) Nos.28130/2010 & 28131/2010 2 2. It is contended that inspite of offer made by the petitioner to wipe off the liability within a reasonable time, the Bank is now proceeding with coercive steps. 3. Sri.S.Eswaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that, from the nature of the transactions which the petitioner had with the Bank, it is evident that there was a calculated attempt to defraud the respondents. The cheques purchased by the Bank were bounced and the petitioner had not remitted the amount inspite of repeated requests. It is further mentioned that the Bank had already effected attachment of other properties belonging to the petitioner by virtue of the orders obtained from the Debt Recovery Tribunal. 4. The petitioner is assailing the proceedings now initiated under the SARFAESI Act mainly on the premise that the O.As filed by the respondents are pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. If the petitioner has any grievance regarding the coercive steps now being proceeded against the secured assets, before finalising the matter pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, it is for him to approach the Tribunal and seek appropriate reliefs. Considering the fact that the matter is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal W.P(C) Nos.28130/2010 & 28131/2010 3 and also considering the effective statutory remedy available to the petitioner under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, I am not at all inclined to entertain this writ petition on merits in a proceedings initiated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Under the above circumstances, the writ petitions are dismissed, without prejudice to rights of the petitioner, if any available under law, to approach the appropriate authority seeking reliefs in the matter. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab