Allowed

Sheeja v. the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Kerala HC3 Dec 2013OP (DRT)/4156/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court set aside an order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal refusing to condone delay in filing an appeal under the SARFAESI Act. The Court followed the Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana view allowing condonation, distinguishing the Madras High Court's contrary stance, and remitted the matter for merits consideration.

What did the court decide?

The order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal refusing condonation of delay is set aside; matter remitted for reconsideration on merits.

Sheeja Vs the Authorised Officer, State Bank… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 OP (DRT).No. 4156 of 2013 (O) -----------------------------I.A. NO. 2624/2011 IN SA NO. 710/2011 ON THE FILE OF DRT, ERNAKULAM

¶5

PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT IN AIR(SA) 101/2012 OF DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL.:

¶6

SHEEJA, W/O.NAZIMUDEEN, JABBAR BUILDING, PUTHURAL PARAYIDAN, CONTONMENT SOUTH, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.T.A.JOY SRI.NIXON PAUL

¶7

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN AIR (SA) 101/2012 OF DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL.:

¶8

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, REGIONAL OFFICE KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 008.

¶9

STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE MAIN BRANCH, KOLLAM 691008, REP.BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

¶10

G.M.J.AUTOMOBILES CONTONMENT SOUTH, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691008 REP.BY NAJIMA SHIHAB.

¶11

SHEENA BAKERS CONTONMENT SOUTH, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691008 REP.BY LATHEEFA BEEVI.

¶12

BY SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC, SBT

¶13

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

OP (DRT).No. 4156 of 2013 (O)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

EXHIBIT P1 : THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/10/2013 IN AIR (SA) 101/2012 OF DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT CHENNAI.

¶18

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶19

/TRUE COPY/

¶20

P.A. TO JUDGE.

¶21

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶22

OP(DRT) NO. 4156 OF 2013

¶23

Dated this the 3^rd day of December, 2013

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

This Original Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenges Ext.P1 order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal refusing to condone delay. The slight delay in filing the appeal against the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act has been refused to be condoned. This is on the reasoning that there is no power to condone delay following the judgment of the High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 13456/2012 and connected cases.

¶26

I have disagreed with the view taken by the High Court of Madras and followed the decision rendered by the division bench of the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana on this issue. The judgment is reported in Shree Vidyadhiraja Vidya Samajam Vs. Indian Overseas Bank [2013 (4) KLT 528] where elaborate reasons have been given. There is no reason to take a different view despite the persuasive

¶27

¶28

OP(DRT) No. 4156/2013

¶29

arguments of the bank based on Seth Banshidhar Kedia Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. and others Vs. State Bank of India and others [AIR 2011 Madhyapradesh 205] .

¶30

Ext.P1 order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal for reconsideration of the application for condonation of delay on merits. The sufficiency or otherwise of the explanation offered for condonation of delay shall be considered and the application dealt with on merits following Shree Vidyadhiraja Vidya Samajam 's case aforecited.

¶31

The parties shall appear before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal on 02.01.2014 and the Registry shall forthwith despatch a copy of the judgment thereto.

¶32

The Original Petition is disposed of.

¶33

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶34

ncd

Sheeja v. the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheeja v. the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paul T.Kurian Vs Shanavas

Navas P.H Vs State of Kerala

Viswanathan K Vs Government of Kerala

K.Sivaprasad Vs Sri.K.G.Mohanlal

The Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Limited Vs M/S.Ardeshir B.Cursetjee & Sons Ltd.

M.Hidayath Vs Chief Manager (Authorised Officer)