Wednesday vs Mathew
2021 Latest Caselaw 8854 Ker

WP(C) 16294/2020                              1/3

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                           Present:
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

                   Wednesday,the 17th day of March 2021/26th Phalguna, 1942
                                   WP(C) No.16294/2020(J)
PETITIONER

           For information purpose only
       SASIDHARAN NAIR ALIAS KESKAR,
       CHANDRAMAGALAM HOUSE, GURUPURAM, SOUTH ARYAD,
       AVALUKUNNU P.O, ALAPPUZHA- 688 006.
RESPONDENTS
1. STATE BANK OF INDIA
     RASMEC ALAPPUZHA, 1ST FLOOR, KALLUPALATHIL BUILDING, CCSB
     ROAD, IRON BRIDGE P.O, ALAPPUZHA- 688 012.
2. STATE BANK OF INDIA,
     AVALUKUNNU BRANCH, ALAPPUZHA- 688 006.
3. SUMESH NAIR,
     CHANDRAMAGALAM HOUSE, GURUPURAM SOUTH ARYAD,
     AVALUKUNNU P.O, ALAPPUZHA 688 006

     NOW RESIDING AT 302, MANGALAM PRESIDENCY OPPOSITE
     SREENATH HILL VASTRAL P.O, NEAR RAS CAMP AHMEDABAD,
     GUJARAT PIN- 382 418.
4. UNNIPILLAI,
     (LEGAL HEIR OF THE LATE SUMATHYKUTTY AMMA)
     CHANDRAMANGALAM KANJIKUZHY P.O, MUHAMMA, ALAPPUZHA
     DIST- 688 525.
5. SIVAPRASAD,
     (LEGAL HEIR OF THE LATE SUMATHYKUTTY AMMA) SITHARA,
     KOLLAKADAVU, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DIST- 690 101
6. SREEKUMAR,
     (LEGAL HEIR OF THE LATE SUMATHYKUTTY AMMA) SREEVILASAM,
     AVALUKUNNU P.O,
     ALAPPUZHA DIST. -688 006
  Writ Petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit
filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be pleased to direct the 1st and 2nd
respondents to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the demand notice dated
17-06-2020 during the pednency of this writ petition.
 WP(C) 16294/2020                            2/3



   This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and the affidavit
filed    in    support   of   WP(C)    and   upon   hearing   the   arguments   of   M/S
R.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, J.LAKSHMI, K.J.GLAXON, &RAGHUL
SUDHEESH, Advocates for the petitioner, SRI. K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SENIOR
ADVOCATE) for respondents 1 & 2 and of SRI.K.M.BIJU, Advocate for respondent
4, the court passed the following:-
             For information purpose only
 WP(C) 16294/2020                           3/3




                                     A.M.BADAR, J.
                                        -------------
                               WP(C) No.16294 of 2020
                                        -------------
                          Dated this the 17th day of March 2021


           For information
                      ORDER

purpose only Prima facie it is seen that the writ petition, as framed and filed, is not maintainable in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and another vs. Mathew K.C reported in 2018 (1) KLT 784. The petitioner is challenging the steps taken by the secured creditor by issuing demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on earlier occasion, the petitioner had approached the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal in the matter but his application came to be rejected. If that is so and if the petitioner is aggrieved by such rejection, the petitioner has remedy to challenge the said order by filing appeal under the SARFAESI Act. However, as the learned counsel for respondents is seeking adjournment, post after four weeks.

Sd/-

A.M BADAR, JUDGE

smp

/true copy/ Sd/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR