IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 27770 of 2007(E)
1. M/S JAYALAKSHMI AGENCIES,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.B.PREMNATH (E)
For Respondent :SRI.SATHISH NINAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :18/09/2007
O R D E R
M.N.Krishnan, J.
========================
W.P(C).No.27770 of 2007
========================
Dated this the 18th day of September, 2007.
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of
mandamus or order staying all the proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P5 sale notice till the disposal of S.A.No.73 of 2007 before
the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. I am informed that the
writ petitioner has moved an appeal and along with the same the
petitioner moved an application, I.A.No.1545 of 2007 for stay. It
is further informed that the court has only ordered urgent notice
on the same. Now, the learned counsel wants this Court to issue
a direction not to conduct the sale. I am afraid, in law, he is not
entitled to such a request for the reason that one cannot pursue
two parallel remedies in respect of the same matter at the same
time (Jai Singh v. Union of India – A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 898). It is
also to be stated that the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the
Constitution can be exercised only under certain conditions as
WP(C)27770/07 -: 2 :-
held by the Apex Court in Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai –
2003 (3) K.L.T. 490. I had gone through paragraph 37 of the
said decision and I am convinced that none of those grounds also
in existence for invoking the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the
Constitution.
2. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed. But I make it
clear that this will not preclude the writ petitioner from moving
an application for advancement of the stay application before the
Debt Recovery Tribunal and pray for orders of the said Tribunal.
M.N.Krishnan,
Judge.
ess 19/9