JOSEPH KAVALAM Vs. CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P9 notice issued by the respondents under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), on the ground that the classification of the loan account as a 'non performing asset', is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner inter alia seeks direction against the respondents to consider the request made for increase in the rate of rent payable to the petitioner, from 24.2.2010 onwards till surrender of the premises, with respect to the building of the petitioner which is at present occupied by the respondents.

(2.) IT is noticed that, against Ext.P9 demand made under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply, as evidenced from Ext.P10. Going by provisions contained under section 13(3A), it is obligatory on the part of the respondents to consider objections if any raised against the demand under section 13(2). IT is now submitted that, after considering Ext.P10, the respondents have taken a decision and intimated the same to the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the said decision, it is left open to him to invoke remedy as provided under section 17(1), when the respondents proceed with further steps.

(3.) HOWEVER, when the writ petition came up for consideration on 12.4.2011, it was submitted on behalf of the respondent Bank that they are intending to vacate the premises in question, within a short period. On that premise, further proceedings under the SARFAESI Act was directed to be kept in abeyance till 31.5.2011.