Dismissed

Retna Easwaran v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC2 Feb 2018WP(C)/745/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that the writ petition seeking direction to banks not to declare the petitioner as a wilful defaulter was premature as no procedure had been initiated. The court ruled the anxiety regarding CIBIL inclusion lacked legal foundation and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents not to declare petitioner as wilful defaulter dismissed; liberty of parties to proceed as per law preserved.

Retna Easwaran Vs State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 13TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 745 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RETNA EASWARAN, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.K.EASWARAN, 52, M.R.SQUARE, D.H.ROAD, COCHIN -682 016.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.P.SATHISAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE BANK OF INDIA, SME BRANCH, R.S.BUILDINGS, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN: 682 011.

¶11

2. UNION BANK OF INDIA, UNION BANK BHAVAN, ERNAULAM MAIN BRANCH, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN: 682 035.

¶12

3. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KATHIRKADAVU BRANCH, KALOOR, COCHIN - 682 017.

¶13

4. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, NORTH END, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN: 682 035.

¶14

5. FEDERAL BANK, PATHANAMTHITTA, P.B.NO.14, COLLEGE ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA -689 645.

¶15

6. KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

7. M/S.KAPICO KERALA RESORTS PVT. LTD.,

¶17

3RD FLOOR, MUTHOOTTUMINI TECH TOWERS, KALOOR, KOCHI -682 017.

¶18

2/-

¶19

-2-

¶20

WP(C).No. 745 of 2018

¶21

8. MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. KAPICO KERALA RESORTS PVT. LTD., 3RD FLOOR, MUTHOOTTUMINI TECH TOWERS, KALOOR, KOCHI -682 017.

¶22

R1 BY SRI.TOM K.THOMAS,SC SRI.JITHESH MENON, SC, SBI R2 BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP,SC R3 BY SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH, SC, R4 BY SRI.K.M.ANEESH,SC R5 BY ADVS. SRI.PETER THARAKAN SRI.FRANCIS PETER THARAKAN R6 BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN R7 & R8 BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SMT.G.MINI SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

sts

¶25

WP(C).No. 745 of 2018 (P)

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶28

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 17.04.2015	LETTER ISSUED BY PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE	ENDORSEMENT WITH ROC.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT THROUG	LETTER DATED 22.04.2015 PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST H E-MAIL.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR FORM OF	RELEVANT EXTRACT OF MASTER RBI DATED 01.07.2014.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE BY THE 2ND RESPON	LETTER DATED 09.10.2017 ISSUED DENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE BY 3RD RESPONDENT	LETTER DATED 08.11.2017 ISSUED .
EXHIBIT P6(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE ISSUED UNDER INST	LETTER NOTICE DATED 12.12.2017 RUCTIONS FROM THE RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE	LETTER FROM SBI DATED 16.12.2017

¶29

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶35

WP(C) No.745 of 2018

¶36

Dated this the 2^nd day of February, 2018

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to respondents 1 to 6 not to impart any information declaring the petitioner as a wilful defaulter, considering Ext.P4 or other directives of Reserve Bank of India regarding credit information and also seeking other consequential reliefs.

¶39

The contentions raised in the writ petition is not dealt

¶40

with in detail in view of the Counter Affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent as the leader of the consortium of Trust of Banks in the party array. Paragraph 10 of the said Counter Affidavit is relevant, which is extracted below:

¶41

“10. With regard to the averments in paragraph 16 of the Writ Petition, it is submitted that respondent banks have not started the procedure for declaring the petitioner as a wilful defaulter. The bank shall submit their proposal before the appropriate authority in this regard as per the guidelines of the Reserve bank of India and State Bank of India, relating to wilful defaulters, in

¶42

WP(C) No.745 of 2018

¶43

¶44

due course. As of now no action has been taken in that regard. Therefore, the writ petition itself is premature and is liable to be dismissed on that sole ground.”

¶45

Therefore, in my considered opinion, the anxiety

¶46

expressed by the petitioner that the petitioner will be included in the Cibil or in the consequential actions is only apprehensive, but it has no legal foundation.

¶47

Therefore, the submission made by the 1^st respondent leader of the consortium Bank is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of, leaving open the liberty of the respective party to proceed in accordance with law.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

¶50

sp/02/02/18

¶51

//True Copy//

¶52

P.A. To Judge

Retna Easwaran v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Retna Easwaran v. State Bank of India

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

T.A.K Thommen Vs the Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk

D.Manoharan Vs State of Kerala

K. Sasikumar Vs the State of Kerala

Sankaran Ezhuthachan Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

St. Thomas Cathedral Kuries Vs State of Kerala

Sarada Vs the State of Kerala