The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging an interim order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal that refused to recall a witness for cross-examination, holding that there were no compelling reasons for interference at that stage.
Writ petition dismissed; no interference with the interim order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/28TH BHADRA, 19382016
OP (DRT).No. 84 of 2016 (O)
I.A.NO.2502/2015 IN O.A.NO.407/2012 OF THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONER/4TH DEFENDANT.:
MALAYALAM INDUSTRIES LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MERMAID COMPLEX, KANIAMPUZHA ROAD, VYTTILLA, KOCHI-682019. REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER JAYASANKAR KRISHNAPILLAI, LAKSHMI NIVAS, VYMEETHI, THRIPUNITHURA.
BY ADVS.SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN SMT.V.RENJU SRI.P.ANIYAN SRI.NIKHIL K GOPINATH
RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT AND DEFENDANT NOS.1, 2 AND 3.:
1. CORPORATION BANK, EDAPALLY BRANCH, KURIEKAL TOWERS, POOKATTUPADY ROAD, TOLL JUNCTION, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM BRANCH CODE-0893.
2. M/.S MATHSTRAMAN MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS PVT. LTD, PLOT NO.71,72, MAJOR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, SOUTH KALAMASSERY ,ERNAKULAM-683109.
3. THOMAS GEORGE, S/O GEORGE JOHN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEELAMPILALIL HOUSE, VIJAYA ROAD, AYANI NADA, MARADU PO, ERNAKULAM.682304.
OP (DRT).No. 84 of 2016 (O)
4. ASHA MARY THOMAS, W/O THOMAS GEROGE,AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEELAMPILALIL HOUSE, VIJAYA ROAD, AYANI NADA, MARADU PO, ERNAKULAM-682304.
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DSV/22/9/16
OP (DRT).No. 84 of 2016 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED ON 22.11.2012. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE I.A.NO.2502 OF 2015 IN O.A.NO.407 OF 2012. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO.2502 OF 2015 ON 22.8.2016.
RESPONDENTS’EXHIBITS : -----------------------
NIL
// True Copy // P.A. To Judge DSV/22/9/16
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
------------------------------------- O.P.(DRT) No.84 of 2016
Dated this the 19th day of September, 2016
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges Ext.P3 an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in an application to recall the witness for further cross-examination. Petition was filed by the fourth defendant in the original application. The contention urged by the petitioner is that the Board resolution dated 16.9.2009 was a forged one and the same has been fraudulently created. Further it was contended that the documents were marked without recording his objection and for that purpose, the crossexamination of the witness is required. The Tribunal, after considering the matter, observed that the fourth defendant had no case or contention in the affidavit filed that the Bank official had fraudulently fabricated the resolution. Further it was observed that there is no compelling reason for recalling the witness. Since the Tribunal had considered the matter and
O.P.(DRT) No.84 of 2016
-2-
had arrived at a proper decision based on factual aspects involved in the matter, I do not think that this Court will be justified in interfering with such an interim order at this stage of proceedings. However, after final adjudication of the matter,
if the petitioner is aggrieved by the orders passed, it shall always be open for the petitioner to challenge the same in a proper appeal to be filed before the appellate authority.
In the said circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with Ext.P3 order at this stage of proceedings. Writ petition is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE
Scl/19.09.2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the interim order of recalling a witness should be allowed at this stage.
MALAYALAM INDUSTRIES LTD.
CORPORATION BANK
M/S MATHSTRAMAN MANUFACTURERS AND TRADERS PVT. LTD
THOMAS GEORGE
ASHA MARY THOMAS
A.M. SHAFFIQUE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
