Writ petition filed seeking direction to the Debt Recovery Tribunal to serve interim orders. Court found petitioner abused process and misstated facts regarding order dates and non-existence of an order. Petition dismissed without further direction.
Writ Petition dismissed; no further direction passed.
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
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/12TH ASWINA, 1938
OP (DRT).No. 86 of 2016 (O)
SA 63/2016 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL NO 11, ERNAKULAM
-------------------
PETITIONER(S)/APPLICANT:
1. ABDUL GAFOOR E.S, AGED 48, S/O.E.K.SAIDU MOHAMED, EDAVANAKATT HOUSE, EDAVILANGU P.O, KARA, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. P.C. THAHIRA, AGED 43, W/O.ABDUL GAFOOR E.S., EDAVANAKATT HOUSE, EDAVILANGU P.O, KARA, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM)
RESPONDENT(S)/DEFENDANTS:
1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER, KODUNGALLUR BRANCH, NORTH NADA, KODUNGALLUR -680 664.
2. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD, NORTH NADA, KODUNGALLUR- 680 664.
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.V.
OP (DRT).No. 86 of 2016 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.7.2016 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR IN CRL.MP NO.4111/2016.
P2 TRUE COPY OF THE S.A. NO.63/2016 DATED 18.8.2016 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL NO.II, ERNAKULAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
K.V.
**A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * *** O.P.(DRT) No.86 of 2016
Dated this the 4th day of October 2016
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition has been filed inter alia seeking for the following reliefs:
“i) To pass an order directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal No.II, Ernakulam to serve copy of interim orders passed on 20.8.2016 and 8.9.2016 in I.A.No.457/2016 in S.A.No.63/2016 within a time limit;
ii) To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
“I am directed to refer to the above mentioned letter received from Registrar (Judicial) High Court of Kerala asking for a report from Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-2 Ernakulam regarding the time that may be required in serving copies of interim
O.P(DRT) No.86/2016
2
orders dated 20/8/16 and 08/09/2016 in IA 457/16 in SA 63/16 and the reason for the delay in providing the same.
In this connection, it is submitted that copy of order dated 8th Sep 2016, sought vide application dated 8th Sep 2016 by the applicant has already been prepared within the stipulated time of 15 days mentioned in DRT Regulations, hence there is no delay on the part of DRT-2 in furnishing the certified copy however, the same has not been collected by the applicant so far from this Tribunal. Further, the applicant has not brought to the notice of this Tribunal any urgency in obtaining the copy, in which case it could have been made available. In the second application dated 8th Sep 2016, the applicant sought for a copy of interim order dated 24/8/2016, whereas, no such order is available in the file, hence the application has been marked defective by this Tribunal.
This issues with the approval of Presiding Officer.”
O.P(DRT) No.86/2016
3
process of Court. The certified copy in respect of the interim order dated 08/09/2016 was ready within the stipulated time of 15 days and even there was no interim order dated 24/08/2016. In the writ petition, the petitioner had referred to an interim order dated 20/08/2016 whereas in the application filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, what is sought for is a copy of the interim order dated 24/08/2016.
This writ petition is, hence, dismissed.
(sd/-)
(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)
jsr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the direction sought by the writ petitioner directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal to serve interim orders within a time limit was warranted?
Whether the delay in serving interim orders by the Debt Recovery Tribunal amounted to abuse of process of court?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abdul Gafoor E.S & Anr.
The Federal Bank Ltd & Anr.
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
