The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions are the creditor Bank, who are aggrieved by the interdiction of SARFAESI proceedings by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (CDRF), Alappuzha. The bare facts necessary for the adjudication of the aforesaid cases are that, the petitioner Bank proceeded under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002, and approached the jurisdictional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court for taking possession of the property. 2. The petitioners then invoked the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and moved the CDRF, Alappuzha, which, interdicted the Bank from proceeding further. A learned single Judge of this Court in H.D.F.C W.P.(C) Nos. 3849 of 2009 2 Bank Ltd. v. Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum in [2011(2) KLT 132] found that the Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, would have no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon steps initiated under the SARFAESI Act.
3. In such circumstance, W.P.(C) No. 3849 of 2009 is allowed setting aside Ext.P6 and declaring that the CDRF, Alappuzha does not have any jurisdiction to proceed with Ext.P7. W.P.(C) No. 3850 of 2009 is allowed setting aside Ext.P5 and declaring that the CDRF, Alappuzha does not have any jurisdiction to proceed under Ext.P4. W.P.(C)No. 3851 of 2009 also is allowed declaring that the CDRF, Alappuzha does not have any jurisdiction to proceed with Ext.P7 and setting aside Ext.P6 order.
With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petitions are allowed.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // True Copy // P.A To Judge.