Petitioner impugned SARFAESI proceedings initiated by respondents claiming inherited rights. Court held that since father mortgaged property and bank proceeded within limits of mortgagor's title, petitioner's rights unaffected. Writ petition disposed of with no elaboration.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/12TH BHADRA 1934
WP(C).No. 19150 of 2012 (P)
PETITIONER(S):
AMRUTHA V.P.,
D/O. VENUGOPALAN, PARASSERY HOUSE, CHELANNUR.P.O. KOZHIKODE-673616.
BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJAN
RESPONDENT(S):
BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH, SC, KOZHIKODE DIST.CO.OP. BANK, LTD. BY SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, SC, MEAT PRODUCTS OF INDIA LTD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).19150/12
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO. 5 OF 1980 OF THE THAMARASSERY SRO.
EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO. 20 OF 2002 OF THAMARASSERY.S.R.O.
EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1431 OF 2006 OF THAMARASSERY SRO
EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28-11-2011 NO. R. CELL/SARFAESI/748/KKDY/CLD 2486/11-12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15-11-2011 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED IN C.M.P. NO. 2411/2011 ON THE FILES OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE.
EXT.P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO. OF 2012.
EXT.P7TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED 9-7-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 9-7-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SISTER MRIDULA BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
/true copy/ PA To Judge
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
........................................ W.P.(C).19150/2012
.............................................. Dated this the 3rd day of September, 2012
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
W.P.(C).19150/12
2
the property was mortgaged by the father with the Bank for availing of loan is also not in dispute. If that be so, when default was committed, the Bank is entitled to proceed against the property to the extent the mortgagor has title over the same. This precisely is what the Bank has done.
In such a situation, petitioner's rights cannot be affected and clarifying the position as above, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
mrcs
/true copy/ PA To Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings initiated by the bank against a mortgaged property is tenable.
AMRUTHA V.P.
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
