This writ petition challenged the unauthorized transfer of execution proceedings from a civil court to the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT). The bench, relying on Supreme Court precedent regarding the scope of S. 8(2), dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissed; the transfer of proceedings to the DRT is upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2007 / 15TH BHADRA 1929
OP.No. 6685 of 1998(U)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
---------------
DEEPA TIMBERS & WOOD WORKS, VALLAKADAVU PO., TRIVANDRUM REP.BY ITS PROPRIETOR L.A.XAVIER D'CRUZ, VELIATHURA, TRIVANDRUM 695 008.
BY ADV. SRI.M.STANLEY FERNANDEZ
RESPONDENTS:
------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.
2. DENA BANK, TRIVANDRUM BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM.
3. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, SPENSOR TOWERS, 6TH FLOOR, 770 A, ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI 600 002.
BY ADV. SRI.L.MOHANAN
SRI.D.SAJEEV SRI.S.SREEKUMAR NAIR
THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/09/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP. NO.6685/1998
ORDER ON CMP. NO.11863/1998 IN OP. 6685/1998
DISMISSED
06.09.2007
SD/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE EP 275/96 IN OS. 50/1985 OF THE SUB COURT , TRIVANDRUM DT. 2.1.98.
EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL CHENNAI IN T.A. 1356/97.
/TRUE COPY/
P.S. TO JUDGE
tss
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
O.P.No.6685 of 1998-U
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 6th day of September, 2007.
JUDGMENT
The plea of the petitioner is that the proceedings by which execution proceedings pending before a civil court has been transferred to DRT is unauthorized. The said contention does not stand in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Punjab National Bank v. Chajju Ram [ (2000) 6 SCC 655]. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.
Sha/-
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
O.P.No.6685 of 1998-U
JUDGMENT
Dated: 6th September, 2007.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the transfer of execution proceedings pending before a civil court to the DRT is unauthorized.
Whether the High Court can quash the transfer order made under Section 19 of the RDDB Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Punjab National Bank v. Chajju RamFollowed¶36
Punjab National Bank v. Chajju Ram (2000) 6 SCC 655 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Deepa Timbers & Wood Works Rep. by its Proprietor L.A.Xavier D'Cruz
Union of India
Dena Bank
Debts Recovery Tribunal
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
