Writ petitioner, wife of a defaulter, challenged coercive banking proceedings and an ex-parte order. High Court directed DRT to decide on the stay application within one month and maintain status quo.
Directing the DRT to decide the I.A. for staying proceedings within one month and maintaining status quo.
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 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936
OP (DRT).No. 110 of 2014 (O)
DRC 3708/2012 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.
PETITIONER:
LIMI LENI, W/O.LENI KURIAKOSE, AGED 39 YEARS, PUNTHANKANDATHIL HOUSE, AREEKKARA, KOODAPPALAM P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PIN - 686 576.
BY ADVS.SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA) SRI.UMESH.N.PAI
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE BANK OF INDIA,
2. LENI KURIAKOSE, S/O.KURIAKOSE,
R1 BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS, SC
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
OP (DRT).No. 110 of 2014 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: - NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
mbr/
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
O.P.(D.R.T.) No.110 of 2014
Dated this the 19th day of December, 2014.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the wife of the 2nd respondent. Admittedly, some financial assistance was availed from the 1st respondent Bank. According to the petitioner, she was made to sign some documents in connection with the financial assistance as above, creating mortgage over the property belonging to her (which is stated as a joint property, as put forth by the learned counsel for the respondent Bank), without her knowledge or consent. The amount was utilised by the 2nd respondent/husband. But in view of the default, the Bank proceeded with further steps by filing O.A. No.81 of 2014. In the meanwhile, the marital relationship between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent got ruptured and the petitioner is residing with her parents. Since the matter was not contested by the 2nd respondent/ husband, an exparte award was passed on 17.09.2012. According to the petitioner, she came to know about the said proceedings only much later, upon which Ext.P2 I.A. has been filed before the Tribunal, seeking to set
O.P.(D.R.T.) No.110 of 2014
2
aside the exparte order passed on 17.09.2012. It is stated that, a detailed written statement has already been filed, a copy of which has been produced as Ext.P3. The 1st respondent has filed a Counter Affidavit in Ext.P2 I.A. as borne by Ext.P4. In spite of the pendency of the proceedings as above, the Recovery Officer, D.R.T. is proceeding with steps for selling the property. The petitioner has filed Ext.P5 objections. But, since the threat continues, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing this writ petition, for causing Ext.P2 petition to be disposed of within a reasonable time and to intercept the coercive proceedings till such time.
O.P.(D.R.T.) No.110 of 2014
3
forum with regard to the alleged rupture of the marital bond in between. In any view of the matter, this Court does not propose to go into such aspects as it may be a fact, which is to be looked into by the D.R.T. at the relevant time, when the case projected by the petitioner vide Ext.P2 is considered.
After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the D.R.T., Ernakulam to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, (hearing of which is stated as over), at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one month' from today.
'Status quo' shall be maintained till such time.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the D.R.T., Ernakulam, for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE
sp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dispose of the writ petition to ensure disposal of the stay application within a reasonable time and to maintain status quo.
Limi Leni
State Bank of India
Leni KuriaKose
P.R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
