IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 61 of 2007()
1. P.M. KUKNJU BAVA, C/O.K.E. BASHEER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE HONGKONG AND SHANGHAL BANKING
... Respondent
2. DR. C.I.GEORGE,
For Petitioner :SRI.WILSON URMESE
For Respondent :SRI.VARGHESE.C.KURIAKOSE
The Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice MR.J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :21/01/2009
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY, Ag.CJ & V.GIRI, J.
===========================
W.A.No.61 of 2007
===============================
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
Koshy, Ag.CJ.
According to the appellant, his property was sold while
recovering amounts due to the bank under the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act, 2002. He contends that the above action is without
notice and without jurisdiction and the amount realised from the
sale proceedings was meagre and has no reflection to the market
value. The learned Single Judge directed the petitioner to avail
remedies under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the
writ petition was not maintainable. We see no ground to
interfere in the impugned judgment. Appellant has to file an
application under Section 17 of the Act before the Debt Recovery
Tribunal. However, we give three weeks’ time to the appellant to
file an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
W.A.No.61 of 2007
2
Interest Act, 2002 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. If such an
application is filed within three weeks from today, it should be
considered on merits in accordance with law.
The writ appeal is disposed of as above.
J.B.KOSHY,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.
V.GIRI, JUDGE.
bkn/-