Dismissed

Mathuchan George v. Bank of Baroda

Kerala HC3 Sept 2018OP (DRT)/102/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is a brief order dismissing an objection to an interim application in a Debt Recovery Tribunal appeal regarding disputed asset dispossession by a bank. The court directed the Tribunal to expedite the disposal of the underlying appeal.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Debt Recovery Tribunal to dispose of the interim application within one week if the appeal is not yet finally heard, or within four weeks if the appeal is finally heard.

Mathuchan George Vs Bank of Baroda — Kerala HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 12TH BHADRA, 1940

¶5

OP (DRT).No.102 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SA 171/2018 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

MATHUCHAN GEORGE, AGED 37 YEARS,S/O GEORGE,VELLALRINGATTU HOUSE, KODUMPIDY.P.O, KADANAD, MEENACHIL,KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI. JACOB P.ALEX

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 BANK OF BARODA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER, P.B.NO.171,MADEENA ARCADE, BAKER JUNCTION, CMS COLLEGE ROAD,KOTTAYAM-686011.

¶12

2 REMANI THOMAS, W/O.M.D.THOMAS,MULLARAKKAM HOUSE, NADAKKAL.P.O,ERATTUPETTA,KOTTTAYAM-686121.

¶13

3 M.D.THOMAS, MULLARAKKAM HOUSE,NADAKKAL.P.O,ERATTUPETTA,KOTTAYAM686121.

¶14

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

OP (DRT).No.102 of 2018 2

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner moved Debts Recovery Tribunal in an

¶18

appeal challenging securitisation proceedings. The said

¶19

appeal is numbered as S.A.No.171 of 2018. The

¶20

petitioner submits that the petitioner was illegally dispossessed from secured assets.

¶21

In the light of the submission as above, there

¶22

shall be a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, to dispose the interim application,if the above S.A. is not finally heard so far, after hearing both sides, within one week from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. If the said S.A is finally heard, the Debts Recovery Tribunal shall dispose the same within four weeks.

¶23

This O.P.(DRT) is disposed of as above.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE Judge

¶26

OP (DRT).No.102 of 2018 3

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶29

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 7.3.2013 WITH RENEWAL ENDORSEMENTS.
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF CMP.NO.2115/2016 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.8.2016 COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM IN CMP.NO.2115/2016.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE SCENE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 20.10.2016 OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.4.2017 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT IN WPC.NO.14069/2017.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET OF THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM IN CMP.NO.5952/2017 IN CMP.NO.2115/2016.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.1.2018 OF THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM IN CMP.NO.5952/2017 IN CMP NO.2115/2016.
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 12.3.2018 OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 8.3.2018 PREPARED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.
EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE PANCHNAMA.
EXHIBIT P12	A TRUE COPY OF THE INVENTORY.
EXHIBIT P13	A TRUE COPY OF CMP NO.1163/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM.

¶30

OP (DRT).No.102 of 2018 4

¶31

EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.3.2018 OF THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM IN EXT.P13 CMP NO.1163/2018 IN CMP NO.2115/2016.

¶32

EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF S.A.NO.171/2018 (WITHOUT ANNEXURES) FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 IN S.A.NO.171/2018. EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF TENDER CUM AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 16.6.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶33

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL.

¶34

Mathuchan George v. Bank of Baroda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathuchan George v. Bank of Baroda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeev Vattoli Vs Sunitha Jose

M. Muhammed Fasil Vs the State of Kerala

Shiji Varghese Vs the State of Kerala

Moideen Vs Ajeesh Kunnath

Manoj Alias Manojkumar Vs Shri. Abdul Rasheed

Rincymol Mathew Vs the Mahathma Gandhi University