Dismissed

Jancy Govindan v. the Authorized Officer

Kerala HC9 Aug 2017WP(C)/21652/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by a petitioner disputing outstanding bank figures, the Kerala High Court held that factual disputes regarding recovery matters fall within the domain of the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable on merits, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. No adjudication on the merits was done.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of grievances.

Jancy Govindan Vs the Authorized Officer — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/18TH SRAVANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 21652 of 2017 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

----------

¶8

JANCY GOVINDAN, W/O. GOVINDAN KARITHALACKAL HOUSE, VANDANMEDU,

¶9

IDUKKI -685 551.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

¶11

RESPONDENTS :

¶12

-----------

¶13

1. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, KOTTAYAM.

¶14

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER

¶15

FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, PUTTADY, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :

¶18

¶19

WP(C).No. 21652 of 2017 (F)

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.5.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 5.6.2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE BANK. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY//

¶23

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶24

¶25

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶26

¶27

W.P.(C) No.21652 of 2017

¶28

- - - - Dated this the 9^th day of August, 2017

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner disputes the figures showing the outstanding amounts, and would like to get the matter adjudicated in terms of the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act'. Taking note of the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that, the petitioner should approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for adjudication of the factual aspects of the dispute. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be maintained for adjudication of factual aspects. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal, for a redressal of his grievances.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶33

sm/

Jancy Govindan v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jancy Govindan v. the Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.M.S.Wire Drawing and Wire Nail Private Limited Vs the Reservice Bank of India

Sundhar S.P. Vs State of Kerala

E.K.Ramachandran Nair Vs Appellate Authority Under Payment of Gratuity Act

Ummer A.P. Vs Cheriyamundam Grama Panchayath

All Kerala Plywood & Block Board Manufacturers Association Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Jose Koshy George Vs State of Kerala