Dismissed

Mathew Jacob v. the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC7 Dec 2012OP(C)/4185/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding irregularities in sale and delivery proceedings, the court directed the petitioner to file an execution application under Section 47 CPC to scrutinize voluminous evidence, noting that Article 227 writ jurisdiction is not suited for such detailed inquiries. The original petition was disposed of without prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file execution application within two months; original petition disposed of without prejudice.

Mathew Jacob Vs the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. — 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

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/16TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

OP(C).No. 4185 of 2012 (O)

¶6

EP.NO.160/1999 IN OS.111/1998 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

MATHEW JACOB, AGED 52 YEARS S/O. JACOB MATHEW, RESIDING AT PONMALAI, DHONI P.O. AKATHETHARA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.K.K.JYOTHILAKSHMY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD.

¶12

WEST FORT, THRISSUR

¶13

REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER-680001.

¶14

P.M.SUNILKUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS S/O. LATE MUTHU, PULIKKAL HOUSE, POOCHIRA PUDUPIRIYARAM POST, PALAKKAD DIST-678001.

¶15

R BY ADV. SMT. LATHA KRISHNAN

¶16

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

APPENDIX IN O.P.(C) No.4185 of 2012

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXTS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION, DATED 27-09-2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE BANK.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28-07-2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSIONER REPORT, DATED 11-08-2009 IN OS.NO. 371/2009 OF THE FILED OF SUB COURT, PALAKKAD.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN RECEIPT, DATED 31-05-2010 SHOWING THE DEPOSIT OF RS. 7,00,000/- TOWARDS IN O.S.NO. 111/1998.

¶23

EXHIBIT P5- TURE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08-04-2011 IN OC 570/2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21-03-2012 IN R.P. NO.183/2012 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶25

EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK IN WPC 8923/2012 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶26

EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE BANK IN WPC NO. 8923/2012.

¶27

EXHIBIT P9- TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED, DATED 22-09-2012 REGD. AS DOC.NO. 3199/2012 OF SRO, OLAVAKKODE.

¶28

EXHIBIT P10(a)(b) & (c)-TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DELIVERY PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY SUB COURT, PALAKKAD IN E.P.NO. 160/199 IN OS.NO.111/1998.

¶29

EXHIBIT P11- TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, AKATHETHARA, PALAKKAD.

¶30

//TRUE COPY//

¶31

P.S. TO JUDGE.

¶32

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶33

O.P.(C) No. 4185 of 2012 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7^th day of December, 2012

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

The petitioner alleges serious irregularity in the conduct of the sale besides illegality in the proceedings effecting delivery. It is up to the petitioner to file an execution application calling in aid the provisions of Section 47 of the Code of the Civil Procedure. It is also open to the petitioner to rely on the decision in Thampi v. Kunnathunad Taluk Primary Co-op. Agrl & R.D.Bank Ltd. (2012 (3) KLT 628). Voluminous evidence requires to be let in to substantiate the contentions of the petitioner. Such scrutiny is not possible in proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The motion, if any, made by the petitioner shall be considered by the court below within a period of two months therefrom.

¶36

The original petition is disposed of without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to invoke other remedy known to law.

¶37

V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

¶38

nj.

Mathew Jacob v. the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew Jacob v. the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.P.Chothy Vs Usha

Shajesh Kumar Vs the Dhanalaxmi Bank Ltd.

Jacob T Ummen Vs M.T.Thomas

V.Vijayan Vs the General Secretary, Kerala Thandan Maha Sabha

Pramod Kumar Vs K.C.Pratheep Kumar

Jayan Vs Dileep