The petitioner challenged recovery proceedings against her property, claiming non-liability in the underlying loan. The Court held that an efficacious alternative remedy exists via a claim petition before the Recovery Officer. Consequently, this writ petition was dismissed without prejudice.
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
FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929
WP(C).No. 5430 of 2008(U)
DRC.2316/2007 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER:
LILLY, W/O. C.D.JOSE,
KUNNATHOOR HOUSE, PUTHANVELIKKARA VILLAGE, PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI
SRIJESTIN MATHEW
SRI.PIUS K NEDUMGATTU
RESPONDENTS:
WEST FORT BRANCH, THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
BY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
W.P(C).No.5430 OF 2008
------------------------------------------Dated this the 15th day of February, 2008
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims that she was quite surprised by the proceedings initiated against her property covered by Ext.P1. According to her, she has nothing to do with the loan transaction that has resulted in the recovery certificate issued by the DRT, which led to the listing of her property to sale as per Ext.P4. Her assertion that the property covered by Ext.P4 belongs exclusively to her is a matter that she can agitate before the recovery officer by instituting appropriate claim petition in accordance with law. In view of the availability of such alternate efficacious remedy, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge
kkb.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings against property held by the petitioner can be maintained given the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy under the law.
LILLY, W/O. C.D.JOSE
THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL
THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
M/S. IND ROYAL INNOVATIONS
CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
