P R RAJESH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in IN (SA) No.137 of 2009 dated 05.05.2009.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioners that they along with the parents of the first petitioner availed loan of Rs.15 lakhs each i.e. totally Rs.60 lakhs from the respondent Bank during March, 2006 from its Kayamkulam branch, for which, they have given two landed properties as security. Since the business was not profitable as expected by them, the loan amounts were due and the Bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFEASI Act'). Possession notice was published in news papers viz., 'The New Indian Express' and vernacular daily 'Mathrubhoomi' in respect of the loans at Kayamkulam Branch on 30.05.2007. Questioning the proceedings under the SARFEASI Act, the petitioners filed W.P.(C) No,5917 of 2008 before the Kerala High Court and the same was dismissed on 23.06.2008 with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Thereafter, sale notice in respect of three properties issued on 10.11.2008 and published in 'The New Indian Express' and vernacular daily 'Malayala Manorama'. The petitioners filed S.A.No.192 of 2008 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam for setting aside the proceedings initiated by the Bank as against the scheduled property under the provisions of the SARFEASI Act and other reliefs.

(3.) ON 04.05.2009, the first petitioner's mother filed W.P.(C) No.13263 of 2009 before the Kerala High Court stating that the respondent Bank was not given reasonable opportunity to her and to the petitioners to clear out the liability. When the matter was taken up on 26.05.2009, the writ petitioner and the petitioners herein have given an undertaking that they would vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises in three days. Based on their undertaking, the writ petition was dismissed with a direction that the petitioners herein and the mother and father of the first petitioner shall execute an affidavit to that effect. ON 27.05.2009, they have executed an affidavit of undertaking to give vacant possession of the premises on 30.05.2009. The mother of the first petitioner filed W.A.No.1227 of 2009 before the Kerala High Court against the order dated 26.05.2009 passed in W.P.(C) No.13623 of 2009. ON 16.06.2009, the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court dismissed the writ appeal by observing that "this is a classic example of abuse of the process of the Court" and also imposed a cost of Rs.25,000/-.