Partly allowed

State Bank of India,Kattappana v. Chellappa,S/O.Late Rajamani Pillai

Kerala HC3 Oct 2012CRP/299/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an execution petition filed by a bank to recover dues, the High Court held that the execution court can reduce the upset price despite a prior fixation. The Court set aside orders dismissing two applications related to the sale proceedings and remanded the matter to the Subordinate Judge to proceed afresh, allowing judgment debtors an opportunity for a one-time settlement.

What did the court decide?

Orders dismissing E.A.No.137/2002 and E.P.No.65/1994 were set aside; the execution petition O.S.No.12/1984 was remanded to the Subordinate Judge to proceed afresh.

State Bank of India,Kattappana Vs Chellappa,S/O.Late… — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/11TH ASWINA 1934`

¶5

CRP.No. 299 of 2003 ( )

¶6

OS.12/1984 of SUB COURT,KATTAPPANA ===================

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER-DECREE HOLDER:

¶8

STATE BANK OF INDIA, KATTAPPANA REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI SRI.BENBY GERVACIS

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS-JUDGMENT DEBTORS:

¶11

1. CHELLAPPA S/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI, CARDAMOM PLANTER, NEAR CANARA BANK

¶12

UTHAMAPALAYAM TALUK, MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶13

2. R.PALANIYANDI S/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI NEAR CANARA BANK, UTHAMAPALAYAM, MADURAI DISTRICT TAMILNADU.

¶14

3. R.VELAYYA PILLAI,

¶15

S/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI, NEAR CANARA BANK UTHAMAPALAYAM, MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶16

4. R.PRAKASH S/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI, NEAR CANARA BANK, UTHAMAPALAYAM, MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶17

5. SMT.SENTHARMANI, D/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI AND W/O. S.MUTHUSWAMY 65 MADEKULAM MAIN ROAD, PAZHAGANATHAM, MADURAI TAMILNADU.

¶18

*6. SMT.VELAVALLY D/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI AND W/O. K.VISWANATHAN, PILLYARKOVIL STREET VANDIYOOR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶19

7. SMT.PANDIAMMAL

¶20

W/O. LATE RAJAMANI PILLAI, NEAR CANARA BANK UTHAMAPALAYAM, MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶21

CRP NO.299/2003

¶22

8. AZHAKAVEL S/O. PONNU PILLAI,

¶23

DOOR NO.12/1 MIDDLE STREET, MURUGAILLAM UPPARAPATTIL P.O. (VIA) VEERAPANDI MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶24

9. SMT.A.SANTHI W/O. AZHAKAVEL, DOOR NO.12/1 MIDDLE STREET, MURUGAILLAM

¶25

UPPARAPATTIL P.O. (VIA) VEERAPANDI MADURAI DISTRICT, TAHILNADU.

¶26

10. RAVI S/O. AZHAKAVIL, DOOR NO.12/1 MIDDLE STREET, MURUGAILLAM UPPARAPATTIL P.O (VIA) VEERAPANDI MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶27

11. A.CHITRA D/O. AZHAKAVEL, DOOR NO.12/1 MIDDLE STREET, MURUGAILLAM UPPARAPATI P.O. (VIA) VEERAPANDI MADURAI DISTRICT TAMILNADU.

¶28

12. A.VELARMATI D/O. AZHAKAVEL, DOOR NO.12/1 MIDDLE STREET, MURUGAILLAM UPPARAPATTIL P.O. (VIA) VEERAPANDI MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.

¶29

THE NAME OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF THE PETITIONER VIDE ORDER DATED 13.04.12 IN MEMO BEARING OF NO.1894/12

¶30

R2 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM R2 BY ADV. SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.C.ELDHO R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN

¶31

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

¶33

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶34

--------------------------------C.R.P.No.299 Of 2003

¶35

----------------------------------Dated this the 3^rd day of October, 2012.

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

E.A.No.137/2002 filed by the decree holder bank to

¶38

reduce the upset price (since there were no bidders) was dismissed. This was done on the premise that the upset price had been fixed earlier by the execution court. The fact that the upset price was once fixed does not disable the execution court to further reduce the same if circumstances so warrant. The order dismissing E.A.No.137/2002 is hence set aside.

¶39

E.P.No.65/1994 filed by the bank was also dismissed since no steps were taken after dismissal of E.A.No.137/2002. The bank took some time to ponder over the steps to be taken after the dismissal of E.A.No.137/2002. Sanction was necessary from the higher ups for permission to bid and set off. There is no justification to dismiss the execution petition itself on that court. The order dismissing E.P.No.65/1994 is also set aside.

¶40

The court of the Subordinate Judge of Kattappana shall proceed afresh in E.P.No.65/94 in O.S.No.12/1984 pending

¶41

C.R.P No.299 Of 2003

¶42

¶43

on its file. It is open to the judgment debtors to seek the benefit of one time settlement (if applicable) to avert further steps for sale. The motion if any made by the judgment debtors shall be considered by the bank with compassion and an early decision taken.

¶44

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.

¶45

Sd/V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

P.A TO JUDGE

¶48

State Bank of India,Kattappana v. Chellappa,S/O.Late Rajamani Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India,Kattappana v. Chellappa,S/O.Late Rajamani Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.J.Jose Vs Yogesh Gupta IPS

Kseb Rep. by Its Secretary Vs Radhakrishnan

Kerala Cricket Association Vs Kozhikode District Cricket Association

Rathan Vs Radha

Chandran Vs Saraswathy

Raman @ Ramankutty Vs Kalyani