Dismissed

Bincy Francis v. Abdul Nazar

Kerala HC5 Oct 2017WP(C)/22667/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PT challenged sale of property under SARFAESI Act after bank transferred auction price to third party, despite prior attachment in specific performance suit. Court held bank mortgage was prior to attachment, denying petitioner's prayer to purchase property. Writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for direction to 3rd respondent to permit petitioner to purchase property dismissed; writ petition dismissed.

Bincy Francis Vs Abdul Nazar — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017/13TH ASWINA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 22667 of 2017 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

BINCY FRANCIS, W/O. FRANCIS, AGED 50 YEARS, PANAKKAL HOUSE, PALLIPORT P.O, PIN - 683 515.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. MAJEED, AGED 42 YEARS, THATTATHODI (H), PARAPPANANGADI, NEDUVA P.O, PIN - 676 303.

¶11

2. THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD., ZONAL OFFICE, DJM BUILDING, MARKET ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 011.

¶12

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER & CHIEF MANAGER (LAW), THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD, ZONAL OFFICE, DJM BUILDING, MARKET ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 011.

¶13

¶14

***** ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED

¶15

4. JOHNSON ABRAHAM, S/O ABRAHAM, AGED 48 YEARS, CHOORAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHOORAPARAMBIL LANE, MONASTERY ROAD, KOCHI, PIN-682 011.

¶16

IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29/08/2017 IN I.A.13412/2017.

¶17

R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.C.A.JOY. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA. ADDL. R4 BY ADVS. SRI.B.PREMNATH, SRI.K.K.ALIAS.

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-10-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

rs.

¶20

WP(C).No. 22667 of 2017 (G)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶23

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 31.08.2016 EXECUTED BETWEEN PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB COURT, N. PARAVUR.

¶25

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 20.05.2017.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶31

W.P.(C). No. 22667 of 2017

¶32

===================================================== Dated this the 5^th day of October, 2017

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioner, who is stated to have obtained an attachment over the properties of the 1^st respondent, in a suit filed for specific performance of a sale agreement, has approached this Court aggrieved by the sale conducted by the 2^nd respondent in favour of the additional 4^th respondent in proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act'. In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that on account of the attachment already obtained by him over the property in question, there should be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to permit the petitioner to purchase the property.

¶35

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank as also the learned counsel appearing for the additional 4^th respondent, the auction purchaser.

¶36

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case

¶37

-2-

¶38

W.P.(C). No. 22667 of 2017

¶39

as also the submissions made across the bar, and taking note of the fact that the mortgage was prior to the attachment obtained by the petitioner in the civil suit aforementioned, I am of the view that the prayer sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted. The writ petition, therefore, fails and is accordingly dismissed.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

das/ 05.10.2017

Bincy Francis v. Abdul Nazar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bincy Francis v. Abdul Nazar

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

Susha.S Vs Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Finance Ltd.

Shri. Nisar Puthenpurayil Vs Commissioner of Customs

C.D.Sukumaran Nair Vs the Secretary,Uzhavoor Grama Panchayath

Dalas Varghese Vs Mr. T.K.Vineeth

Ponnamma Varghese Vs State of Kerala

P.J.Tommy Vs Manager, State Bank of India