High Court Kerala High Court

K.K.Sreedharan vs The Canara Bank on 20 June, 2007

Kerala High Court
K.K.Sreedharan vs The Canara Bank on 20 June, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 18981 of 2007(I)


1. K.K.SREEDHARAN, AGED 50 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE CANARA BANK,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :20/06/2007

 O R D E R
                            S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                           --------------------------

                     W.P.(C)No. 18981 OF 2007

                           --------------------------

              Dated this the 20th   day of June, 2007


                             J U D G M E N T

Petitioner challenges Exhibit-P2 proceeding under the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Act on the

ground that notice issued is not in compliance with the relevant

rules. The Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

respondents points out that the petitioner has already filed one

writ petition, in which, originally there was an interim order

directing the petitioner to pay part of the amount, which has not

been complied with. In spite of the same, the case was disposed

of granting further time to the petitioner to pay the amount in

instalments as per Ext.P3 judgment and those conditions also

have not been complied with by the petitioner.

2. In the above circumstances, Learned Counsel for the

respondent submits that this writ petition should not be

entertained.

3. After hearing both sides, I am not inclined to entertain

this writ petition. Sufficient indulgence has been shown to the

W.P.(C)No. 18981 OF 2007

2

petitioner in the matter of payment of amount in instalments. In

spite of the same, petitioner has not paid the amounts. That

being so, I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary

jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. In any event, it is settled

law that proceedings under the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security

Interest (Second) Act 2002 has to be challenged in appeal

before the appropriate authority. Without prejudice to such

rights, this writ petition is dismissed.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

ma

W.P.(C)No. 18981 OF 2007

3