Disposed

Narayanan Nair v. Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal

Kerala HC18 Oct 2016OP (DRT)/93/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an auction purchaser, sought directions to the Recovery Officer to execute pending applications for delivery of possession. The court directed the officer to pass orders on the petitions, noting the high court's stay was short and no formal stay was communicated to the tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 and P6 and take steps to dispose of the matter in accordance with law.

Narayanan Nair Vs Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/26TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

OP (DRT).No. 93 of 2016 (O)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

NARAYANAN NAIR,

¶8

AGD 79 YEARS, S/O. VELAYUDHAN NAIR, ACHUTHANILAYAM, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.DILIP SRI.SAJU N.A. SMT.G.LEKHA SMT.UMA.G.KRISHNAN SMT.DHANYA V.PAVANA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-1, (KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP), VTH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI-682 036.

¶12

2. KALPANA JNANASAMBANDAM THROUGH HER

¶13

POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER RADHIKA PALANISAMI 154, B2, PARN, OM APARTMENT, 4TH STREET, K.K. PUDIR, COIMBATORE, PIN:541 001.

¶14

3. INDIAN BANK,

¶15

THERAPALAYAM BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY THE ZONAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE, CHITOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 027.

¶16

R1 BY ADV. SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC R BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R BY SRI.S.EASWARAN

¶17

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

msv/

¶19

OP (DRT).No. 93 of 2016 (O) ----------------------------

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------EXHIBIT P1: JUDGMENT IN APPEAL 9/2007. EXHIBIT P2: SALE CERTIFICATE REGISTERED IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3: ORDER IN WP 3694/2016 & WMP 3082/2016. EXHIBIT P4: I.A.NO.1732/2016. EXHIBIT P5: INTERIM REPORT FILED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. EXHIBIT P6: I.A.NO.1963/2016. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/

¶22

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶23

------------------------------------ O.P.(DRT).No.93 of 2016

¶24

----------------------------------- Dated this the 18^th day of October, 2016

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

This original petition has been filed by the petitioner who is an auction purchaser of certain item of property which was purchased by a sale conducted by the Recovery Officer attached to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam seeking for a direction to the 1^st respondent to pass orders on Exts.P4 and P6 petitions pending before him for effecting delivery of the property purchased by the petitioner and for other consequential reliefs.

¶27

According to the petitioner, the property was purchased in the auction held on 09.02.2007. An application was filed by the 2^nd respondent for setting aside the sale, which came to be allowed. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Debts Recovery Tribunal which was allowed as per Ext.P1 dated 22.07.2015. The matter was taken in further appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal by the 2^nd respondent. Since there was no regular sitting, she filed W.P.No.3694/2016 before the High Court of Judicature at Madras which was disposed on 14.06.2016 directing to maintain status quo for a period of one month to enable the 2^nd respondent to move the appellate Tribunal. Ext.P3 is the said order. The 2^nd respondent moved the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chennai. However, no stay was granted till date. The petitioner, therefore,

¶28

O.P.(DRT).No.93 of 2016

¶29

¶30

filed I.A.No.1732/2016 on 04.08.2016 before the Recovery Officer to give possession of the property and to take further steps in the matter. Since no action was taken in the matter, this writ petition is filed.

¶31

The learned ASGI appearing on behalf of the 1^st respondent on instructions would submit that no orders were passed on Exts.P4 and P6 petitions, since there was no material to indicate that there was no stay in the matter.

¶32

Perusal of Ext.P3 order would show that status quo order was passed only for a period of one month. The petitioner had filed an affidavit stating that no interim order had been passed by the appellate authority as Ext.P4.

¶33

In the said circumstances, there is no reason why further proceedings should be kept pending by the Recovery Officer. It is needless to state that any orders that might be passed by the Recovery Officer will be subject to any orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal. In the absence of any order of stay being communicated to the Recovery Officer, I don't think that the 1^st respondent need await any further affidavit from the counsel appearing on either side.

¶34

Taking into consideration the aforesaid factual situation, there will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 and P6 and take necessary steps to dispose of the

¶35

O.P.(DRT).No.93 of 2016

¶36

¶37

same in accordance with law.

¶38

This original petition is disposed of as above.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.

¶41

Narayanan Nair v. Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayanan Nair v. Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal

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

Remani Thomas Vs the Authorised Officer, Bank of Baroda

Ambika S Vs the Authorised Officer

V.P.Shanmughan Vs Chief Commissioner of Income Tax

The Catholic Reformation Literature Soci Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

M/S.Amara Raja Batteries Limited Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Nippon Motor Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Regional Transport Officer