IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 2260 of 2008()
1. T.BALAKRISHNAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REGIONAL MANAGER
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :25/11/2008
O R D E R
H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.A.No.2260 of 2008
----------------------------------------------
Dated, this the 25th day of November, 2008
JUDGMENT
H.L.Dattu, C.J.
The appellant herein had availed a housing loan from the
respondent Bank. Since he has committed default in repaying the loan
amount, the respondents have initiated proceedings under the provisions
of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Asset and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (” SARFAESI Act” for
short). Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in initiating the
proceedings under the aforesaid Act, the petitioner was before this Court
by filing W.P.(C) No.28574/2008.
2. Initially, the learned Judge has granted the interim
prayer. The appellant, for the reasons best known to him, had not
complied with the interim orders so passed. Therefore, the learned Judge
has disposed of the writ petition.
3. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single
Judge, the petitioner in the writ petition has presented this writ appeal.
4. Admittedly, what is called in question by the petitioner
before this Court is the proceedings initiated by the respondents in
W.A.No.2260/2008 -2-
exercise of their powers under Section 13(2) and 13 (4) of the
SARFAESI Act. If, for any reason, the petitioner is aggrieved by those
proceedings, he ought to have questioned it before the appropriate
forum as provided under the Act. In our view, the learned Single Judge
ought not to have even entertained the writ petition and ought not to
have granted the interim prayer.
5. In view of the above, we reject this writ appeal without
going into the other details of the case. It is for the petitioner to choose
his remedy, either under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act or any
other law which is in force.
6. In view of the order passed in the writ appeal, no
further order need be passed in I.A.No.979/2008 and therefore, it is
closed.
Ordered accordingly.
(H.L.DATTU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(A.K.BASHEER)
JUDGE
MS