Dismissed

Union Bank of India v. K.P.Satheesan

Kerala HC23 May 2016OP (DRT)/54/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, Union Bank of India, challenged an order recording full satisfaction of a debt certificate despite a pending appeal. The Court held the debtors could settle liabilities per the Tribunal's award; thus, the Bank should have filed an appeal at the Appellate Tribunal. The writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed, reserving the petitioner's right to approach the Appellate Tribunal.

Union Bank of India Vs K.P.Satheesan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2016/2ND JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

OP (DRT).No. 54 of 2016 (O)

¶6

OA 373/2010 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL(KERALA AND LAKSHADWEEP), ERNAKULAM.

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

UNION BANK OF INDIA, KOTTIYAM BRANCH, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, SC SRI.SADCHITH.P.KURUP

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1.K.P.SATHEESAN,S/O.KARUNAKARAN, DWARAKA, 42/2087 A,CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682011. 2.LEELAMMA, W/O.K.P.SATHEESAN, DWARAKA, 42/2087 A, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682011. 3.M/S.CLASSIC MARBLES & GRANITES, A.P.IX/523, MULAKKAD, KOTTIYAM,KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, P.M PRATAP, PIN - 691571.

¶12

4.MR.P.M. PRATAP. GEETHANJALI, ARUNAPURAM, PALAI, KOTTAYAM - 686574.

¶13

5.MR.P.M.SALIM,GEETHANJALI, ARUNAPURAM, PALAI, KOTTAYAM - 686574. 6.MR.P.M. SAJAN, GEETHANJALI, ARUNAPURAM, PALAI, KOTTAYAM - 686574.

¶14

7.MR.P.M. SABU, GEETHANJALI, ARUNAPURAM, PALAI, KOTTAYAM - 686574.

¶15

--2--

¶16

--2--

¶17

OP (DRT).No. 54 of 2016 (O)

¶18

8.THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682036, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

¶19

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

mbr/

¶21

OP (DRT).No. 54 of 2016 (O)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶24

P1 : TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 28.08.2014 IN OA.NO.373/2010. P2 : TRUE COPY OF IA.NO. 2025/2015 IN OA.NO. 373/2010 FILED BY RESPONDENTS 1 & 2.

¶25

P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY PETITIONER IN IA.NO. 2025/2015.

¶26

P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.11.2015 PASSED BY DRT IN IA.NO. 2025/2015 IN OA.NO. 373/2010

¶27

P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE IA.NO. 12/2016 FILED BY RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 IN OA.NO. 373/2010.

¶28

P6 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 19.01.2016 PASSED BY DRT IN IA.NO. 12/2016

¶29

P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07.04.2016 GIVEN BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER.

¶30

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL -----------------------

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶35

------------------------------------ O.P (DRT) No.54 of 2016

¶36

Dated this the 23^rd day of May, 2016

¶37

J U D G M E N T

¶38

The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam by which the Tribunal had recorded full satisfaction of the certificate of debt. The petitioner submits that an appeal has already been filed by the debtors before the Appellate Tribunal and during the pendency of the said appeal, it was not proper on the part of the Tribunal to have recorded full satisfaction of the decree.

¶39

In so far as the Tribunal has determined the amount in O.A.No.373 of 2010, nothing prevents the debtors from settling the liability by paying the full amount as per the terms of the award passed by the Tribunal. The Bank, if aggrieved by the said finding, is entitled to prefer an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and there is no reason why the Bank should approach this Court in the matter.

¶40

Hence, reserving the right of the Bank to approach the Appellate Tribunal for necessary reliefs, this writ petition is dismissed.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶43

Union Bank of India v. K.P.Satheesan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. K.P.Satheesan

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

Roy Kurian Vs the South Indian Bank Ltd.

Shibu S.B Vs the Federal Bank

M/S.Cheriya Mangad Radhayathra One Vanchi Group Vs the Authorised Officer, Bank of Baroda

Sathi.P Vs Asst.Engineer

George J.Thaliath Vs State Bank of India

K.M.Chakkappan Vs Kerala State Electricity Board