Disposed

Smitha James v. the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Kerala HC20 Jul 2015WP(C)/17173/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that disputed facts regarding HDFC/loan liability fall outside writ jurisdiction. Petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy via DRT. Coercive steps were deferred six weeks conditionally upon remitting a specific sum.

What did the court decide?

Coercive steps deferred for six weeks conditionally upon petitioner remitting Rs. 1,50,000 within one month; liberty to approach Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Smitha James Vs the Authorised Officer, State Bank of… — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2015/29TH ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 17173 of 2015 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SMITHA JAMES, RANDANIKKAL HOUSE, KURICHITHANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.MAHESH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, (ASSOCIATE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA) CHIEF MANAGER (ADV.), REGION -3, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, ZONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM - 686 610.

¶11

2. THE MANAGER,

¶12

STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, MARANGATTUPALLY, KOTTAYAM - 686 610.

¶13

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

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

WP(C).No. 17173 of 2015 (V)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶19

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS STATING THE REMITTANCE MADE BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE AFOREMENTIONED LOAN ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED NIL.

¶20

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 5/1/2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶21

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/5/2015 ISSUED BY SRI.SAJI MATHEW KOONTHANAM UNDER THE INSTRUCTIONS OF 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURES:

¶23

ANNEXURE R1: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS PERTAINING TO A/C NO.67186602993 OF THE PETITIONER.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶28

W.P.(C).No.17173 of 2015

¶29

Dated this the 20^th day of July, 2015

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner availed a housing loan from the respondent Bank in the year 2012. On account of default in repaying the loan amount, the Bank initiated 'SARFAESI' proceedings. The same is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶32

The petitioner disputes the liability. According to the petitioner, the overdue amount claimed by the Bank is not correct. The Bank claims that, the overdue amount is around 5,22,000/-.₹ According to the petitioner, the overdue amount is only 1,50,000/-.₹

¶33

This Court cannot decide the disputed question of fact relating to the liability. The petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy. Therefore, the petitioner shall avail such remedy.

¶34

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. However, coercive steps against the petitioner shall be deferred for a period of six weeks on condition that, the petitioner remits an amount of ₹1,50,000/- within one month.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.

¶37

Smitha James v. the Authorised Officer, State Bank of Travancore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smitha James 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State Bank of Travancore Vs M/S.Southern Cables and Engineering Works

Erakkot Moidu Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf T.M. Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Mariyamma Geevarghese Vs Authorized Officer

Devasya K.T. Vs the Village Officer

T.K.Sreemathy Amma Vs the Authorised Officer