IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3086 of 2008(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- PRIYA.N., AGED 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT T.C.4-971 (8), ADITYA BUILDINGS, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.HARISHARMA RESPONDENT: ---------------- THE REGIONAL MANAGER, THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, HOTEL SAFA INTERNATIONAL BUILDING, P.B.NO.473, MALAYALA MANORAMA ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 3086 OF 2008 P ===================== Dated this the 28th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that steps were taken for sale of 2.96 ares of land comprised in Sy.No.3675/18/1/1 and 3738 of Kowdiar Village and the residential apartment situated therein, which belongs to herself and her brother. According to the petitioner, liability is that of a stranger and that respondent had no authority to initiate proceedings against the property. She has filed Ext.P1 appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal as SA No.125/2007 and Ext.P2 stay petition also has been filed. It is stated that though Ext.P3 summons has been issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, since there is no sitting, the petitioner is not in a position to obtain interlocutory orders from the Tribunal. According to her in the meanwhile, the Bank had obtained an order under Section 14 of the Act and on that basis, WPC 3086/08 :2 : steps are taken to dispossess her from the property. It is in this background writ petition has been filed praying for directing the respondent not to take physical possession. 2. As can be seen from the facts, there is a serious dispute as to whether the property is liable to be proceeded against and this dispute is pending consideration of the Debts Recovery Tribunal in appeal No.125/07. While that dispute is pending and on account of the absence of sitting of the Tribunal, the petitioner is not in a position to obtain orders safeguarding her interest. In the meanwhile, I do not think it proper for the Bank to continue action and take physical possession of the properties. If such an event happens, it will cause grave prejudice to the petitioner. In view of the above, I dispose of this writ petition directing that further proceedings for taking over physical possession of the properties mentioned above shall be deferred for six weeks and in the meanwhile it will be up to the petitioner to obtain appropriate orders safeguarding her interest in SA 125/07 now pending consideration of the Debts Recovery Tribunal. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Rp