IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 8625 of 2008(B) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- LOUIS VARGHESE, AGED 27, S/O.VARGHESE UKKEN, PROPRIETOR OF M/S.ROSE TRADERS, RESIDING AT VILLA NO.15, SKY LINE HARMONY, NEAR SOUTH INDIAN HEAD OFFICE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. M/S.UCO BANK, KAVERI BUILDINGS, CLOTH BAZAR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHI-31, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER. 2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER, M/S.UCO BANK, KAVERI BUILDINGS CLOTH BAZAR ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHI-31. BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE K. VARGHESE, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008, ALONG WITH W.P.(C) No. 8792/'08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NOs. 8625 & 8792 OF 2008 ======================== Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T These writ petitions have been filed challenging the Securitisation proceedings initiated against the respective petitioners. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners had availed of loans from the respondent Bank and on account of the defaults committed by them, proceedings were initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. Proceedings have reached the stage of sale. It is at that stage these writ petitions have been filed seeking to challenge the sale proceedings and with a prayer to allow the petitioners to sell the property by private negotiation with prior permission of the Bank and settle the liability. Petitioners allege violation of the provisions of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules in the matter of sale and it is on that basis these writ petitions have been filed. 3. When these writ petitions came up for orders on 13/3/2008 and 14/3/2008 respectively, standing counsel appearing for the Bank entered appearance and the case was adjourned with a direction to obtain instructions in the matter and not to open the tenders that were received WPC 8625 & 8792/08 :2 : in response to the sale notices that were published. 4. Detailed counter affidavits have been filed by the Bank in order to satisfy this court that the entire procedural requirements have been complied with. It is stated that under Exts.R1-1(a), (b) and (c) notices under Section 13(2) were issued by the petitioners in all the addresses furnished and that all the notices were returned unserved. It is stated that the notices were thereafter published by the Bank under Ext.R1 (2) and (3) advertisements published in Mathrubhumi and Hindu Dailies. It is stated that though notices under Section 13(2) were not served on the petitioners, much later to the publication of the notices, representations were made by the petitioners and Exts. R1(4) and (5) have been produced as copies of the same. Even thereafter, the default continued and payments were not made. 5. Possession notices were also published in the newspapers mentioned earlier and Ext.R1(7) and (8) are the notices published. It is submitted that thereafter Ext.R1(9) notice for sale was also issued and the first sale notice is Ext.R1(9) and the second sale notice sent under cover of Ext.R1(10) and (11) is also stated to have been returned by the postal authorities. It is thereafter that the present endeavor is made by the Bank WPC 8625 & 8792/08 :3 : for sale of the property mortgaged. Counsel for the Bank also refers me to the address of the petitioners as given in these writ petitions and submits that this is a new address which is not furnished to the Bank. 6. From the facts as stated in the counter affidavits filed, which are identical in both these cases, I am satisfied that the Bank has complied with the procedural requirements laid down in the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act. If that be so, there is absolutely no merit in the challenge now raised. Writ petitions are only to be dismissed and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp