Allowed

P.K.Ashraf v. Thangavelu

Kerala HC7 Nov 2014OP (DRT)/96/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner, an auction purchaser, sought direction to DRT Ernakulam to finalize pending appeal proceedings within three months to prevent loss due to pendency. Court disposed of the filing directing the Tribunal to decide the merits within the limit.

What did the court decide?

Prescribed three-month timeline for the Debt Recovery Tribunal to consider and finalize pending exhibits via hearing the parties.

P.K.Ashraf Vs Thangavelu — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/16TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

OP (DRT).No.96 of 2014

¶6

OA NO.288/2001 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM.

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

P.K.ASHRAF,S/O.P.K.KUNJU,PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.BABU CHERUKARA

¶10

SMT.ROSAMMA MATHEW SRI.P.A.SALIM SRI.ANZAR BASHEER

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. THANGAVELU,S/O.NOCHUMUTHU CHETTIYAR, ANGALA NIVAS,MARATH LANE,THRISSUR-680001.

¶13

2. BANK OF INDIA,THRISSUR BRANCH, VADAKKEMADAM BUILDING,M.G.ROAD, THRISSUR,PIN-680001.

¶14

BY SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶15

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

OP (DRT).No.96 of 2014

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE IN DRC NO.1255 IN O.A. NO.288/2001 DATED 4-11-2009 ISSUED BY THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM.

¶21

EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE UNREGISTERED APPEAL BEARING THE DATE 5-4-2011 WITHOUT ANNEXURES.

¶22

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers :

¶32

(a) Issue an order directing the Debts Recovery Tribunal Ernakulam to consider and dispose of Exhibit P2 appeal without any further delay.

¶33

(b) Issue any other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and also those are prayed for during the pendency of the case.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is auction purchaser of the concerned property and because

¶35

of the pendency of the proceedings before the DRT, Ernakulam, in connection with Exts. P1 and P2 much loss and hardships are being caused to him. The prayer is only to cause the same to be considered and finalized within a reasonable time.

¶36

Heard the learned standing counsel for the second respondent as well.

¶37

O.P (DRT) No. 96 of 2014

¶38

: 2 :

¶39

Considering the limited extent of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case or to issue notice to the first respondent for the time being. The Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal to finalize the proceedings pursuant to Exts. P1 and P2 , in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the first respondent, at the earliest, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶40

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for further steps.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶43

kmd

P.K.Ashraf v. Thangavelu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.K.Ashraf v. Thangavelu

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

Kiraj Jose Vs State Bank of Travancore

Muneer.K Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Reghunathan Nair Vs the Authorised Officer

Antony K.R Vs N.a.Kripa

Rajagopalan T.N. Vs State of Kerala

Vijayrajan Vs the Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Karunagappally