High Court Kerala High Court

Thomas V.A. vs Syndicate Bank on 6 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
Thomas V.A. vs Syndicate Bank on 6 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 37110 of 2010(K)


1. THOMAS V.A., S/O.ANTONY,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SYNDICATE BANK,REGIONAL OFFICE,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.E.V.MOLY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

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

 Dated :06/01/2011

 O R D E R
                    C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
                 -------------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.37110 of 2010
                 -------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011

                         J U D G M E N T

———————-

This writ petition is filed challenging the sale

proceedings initiated on the basis of Ext.P6 proclamation, in

furtherance of steps taken under the provisions of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).

It is noticed that a securitisation application filed before the

Debts Recovery Tribunal challenging the proceedings is

pending and that the said Tribunal had shown indulgence in

granting a conditional stay. However, the petitioner failed to

comply with the conditions stipulated inspite of various

extensions granted by that Tribunal. Still, on the basis of

submissions made by the learned counsel that the petitioner

is relinquishing all challenges against the proceedings and

that the petitioner will withdraw the securitisation

application, indulgence was shown in directing continuation

of the interim stay granted by the Tribunal till 5.1.2011,

subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.5

W.P.(C).37110/10 -2-

lakhs on or before 31.12.2010. The interim order in this regard

was issued on 20.12.2010.

2. Today, when the writ petition was taken up for

consideration, there was no representation for the petitioner.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank

submitted that the petitioner has not complied with the condition

stipulated by this court.

3. Under the above circumstances, I am of the view that

the writ petition need not be entertained any further.

Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

okb