IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6618 of 2009(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. A.MAMMADEESA, S/O.MOHAMMED, KUMBALAPARAMBIL, MUSLIYARANGADI NEDIYIRIPPU P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. C.KHADEEJA, W/O. MAMMADEESA, KUMBALAPARAMBIL MUSLIYARANGADI, NEDIYIRIPPU P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. K.P ABDUL SALAM, S/O. MOHAMMED, HAJI, KONDASSANPARAMBIL, PADIPURAKKAL HOUSE, MORAYUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.K.VIDYASAGAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LIMITED,MONGAM. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, REGIONAL OFFICE, FEDERAL TOWERS, SAKTHAN THAMPURAN NAGAR, TRICHUR 680 001. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 6618 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009 JUDGMENT The first and second petitioners, husband and wife, availed two individual loans in 1997 to buy laterite cutting machines. They did not repay it in terms of the contract and this has led to the issuance of the impugned notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, in September, 2008. No measure has been taken in terms of Section 13(4). Obviously, the petitioners can make their request for any relief only before the bank. If any measure is taken, they have a remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed, subject to that is stated above. Yesterday, I had dismissed WP(C)6596 of 2009 filed by the third petitioner herein and Sainaba.A as his wife, which writ petition also related to similar and allied transactions of loans for laterite purposes. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/16/3