Ashok Bhushan, C.J.

This Writ Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 23.02.2015 in W.P(C) No.5668 of 2015 by which judgment, the Writ Petition filed by the State Bank of Travancore, respondent No.1 to this appeal, has been allowed setting aside the interim order passed by the Kerala State Consumer Redressal Commission (for short, "Commission") dated 25.11.2014.

2. The parties shall be referred to as arrayed in the Writ Petition.

3. Brief facts giving rise to the Writ Petition are: Respondent Nos.2 and 3 had availed a housing loan of Rs.8 lakhs on 22.12.2003. Further on 04.10.2005, respondent No.2 availed a cash credit facility of Rs.20 lakhs from the petitioner. When both the accounts, i.e., housing loan account and cash credit account became non-performing assets, the petitioner issued notice on 04.04.2012 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2002 Act") demanding Rs.33,15,463/-. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 claimed that the amount as shown in the statement of accounts be accepted and loan account be closed. The petitioner claimed that the said statement did not include the interest thereon after the accounts have been declared NPA. On 24.04.2014 respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed a petition before the Commission, being C.C. No.49 of 2014 in which the following prayers have been made:

"a) Direct the First Opposite Party to close Account No.57004950536 by receiving Rs.6,16,977/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Seven only) and release all collateral documents and charges.

b) Direct the First Opposite Party to close loan Account NO.67003185208 by receiving Rs.13,566/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand Five hundred and Sixty Six only) and release all collateral documents and charges.

c) Direct the First Opposite Party to pay a compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only), to the Complainants for torture, loss and mental agony suffered, out of their deficiency of service and/or unfair trade practice.

d) Direct the First Opposite Party to pay the entire cost of this proceedings.

e) To pass any other order and/or direction that deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."

In the complaint, respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed I.A. No.396 where they prayed for staying all recovery proceedings in the aforesaid two accounts pending disposal of the complaint. The petitioner had invoked Section 13(4) of the 2002 Act by filing an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram under Section 14 of the 2002 Act for taking possession of the property. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate appointed an Advocate Commissioner to take possession of the property. Advocate Commissioner issued notice for taking possession on 31.10.2014. In the meantime sale notice was published in which 17.11.2014 was fixed as the date of sale by the petitioner. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 approached this Court by filing W.P(C) No.28335 of 2014 to quash the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and also the sale notice. The learned Single Judge by judgment dated 14.11.2014 dismissed the Writ Petition observing that the factual issue regarding quantum cannot be examined in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However while dismissing the Writ Petition, the learned Single Judge observed that the Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioners to pursue other appropriate remedy, in accordance with law. After dismissal of the Writ Petition respondent Nos.2 and 3 proceeded with I.A. No.396 of 2014 filed in C.C. No.49 of 2014. The State Commission passed an order on 25.11.2014 which was to the following effect:

"The complainant is directed to remit Rs.6,16,977/- and Rs.13,566/- to the Opposite Party Bank. On such payment the Recovery Proceedings shall be stayed till the disposal of the complaint".