M/S.Santhome Latex Enterprises vs The Authorised Officer on 2 December, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30388 of 2010(W)


1. M/S.SANTHOME LATEX ENTERPRISES,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. JOY KALLARACKAL,
3. BINDU JOY, TC 5/2551,

                        Vs



1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ANIL D. NAIR

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM

 Dated :02/12/2010

 O R D E R
                 C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J
                 -------------------------------
               WP(C) NO. 30388 OF 2010
               -------------------------------------
        Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010


                         JUDGMENT

Challenge in this Writ Petition is against

proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), consequent

to default committed by the petitioners in repayment of

business loans availed from the respondent Bank.

2. Since the petitioner had not availed the

statutory remedies for raising challenges against the

impugned proceedings, this Court was not inclined to

interfere with the matter. However, on the basis of

submissions made by learned counsel that the petitioner

is undertaking to make payment of a sum of Rs.2.5 crores

immediately, an interim stay was granted against further

proceedings subject to condition of payment of the said

amount on or before 15.11.2010. Subsequently the

petitioner filed I.A. 15996/2010 seeking extension of time

2
WP(C) No. 30388/2010

for compliance of the condition on the premise that a sale

proposed with respect to some of the properties belonging

to the petitioner is expected to be completed within a short

period. The above application was allowed on 22.11.2010

and an extension was allowed till 30.11.2010.

3. When the matter came up for consideration on

today, it is submitted that the petitioners could not comply

with the condition stipulated. Under such circumstances, I

am not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition any further.

However, it is made clear that the petitioners will be at

liberty to invoke remedy if any available before the

statutory authority.

4. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed

without prejudice to rights if any available to the petitioner

to invoke the remedy provided under the statute before the

appropriate authority.

C.K. ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE
dnc