Allowed

Jiju K.B. v. Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank Limited

Kerala HC13 Feb 2019OP (DRT)/18/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court of Kerala provisionally recovered the interim order under the SARFAESI Act after petitioners deposited Rs. 15 lakhs within the court hearing, pending final adjudication by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Respondent bank directed not to take further action under the SARFAESI Act until the Debt Recovery Tribunal issues further orders on the petitioners extension application.

Jiju K.B. Vs Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 24TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

OP (DRT).No. 18 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST SA 485/2018 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 JIJU K.B., AGED 43 YEARS S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KALAPURAYIL HOUSE, KARIVANOOR, ETTUMUNA, THRISSUR - 680 711.

¶9

2 JITH.K.B., AGED 44 YEARS S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KALAPURAYIL HOUSE, KARIVANOOR, ETTUMUNA, THRISSUR - 680 711.

¶10

3 THANKAM K.L., AGED 67 YEARS W/O.KUNJIBALAKRISHNAN, KALAPURAYIL HOUSE, KARIVANOOR, ETTUMUNA, THRISSUR - 680 711.

¶11

4 LISHA, AGED 38 YEARS W/O.JITH.K.B., KALAPURAYIL HOUSE, KARIVANOOR, ETTUMUNA, THRISSUR - 680 711.

¶12

5 SAJITHA, AGED 34 YEARS W/O.JIJU.K.B., KALAPURAYIL HOUSE, KARIVANOOR, ETTUMUNA, THRISSUR - 680 711.

¶13

BY ADVS.

¶14

SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN SMT.DEEPA K.RADHAKRISHNAN

¶15

RESPONDENTS:

¶16

THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED KOVILAKATHUMPADAM, SAHAKARANA SHADHAPTHI MANDIRAM, TUDA ROAD, THIRUVAMPADY, THRISSUR -680 022, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶17

SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN-SC

¶18

THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

OP (DRT).No. 18 of 2019

¶20

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioners have filed this original petition since the Debt Recovery Tribunal -II (DRT), Kerala had vacated an earlier order issued by it on the ground that they have not complied with the conditions attached with the said order. The petitioners point out to Ext.P4 to show that the DRT had issued an order in their favour in SA No.485/2018, directing the bank not to take any further action, on condition that they remit Rs.15 lakhs on or before 20.01.2019. They say that they were, however, unable to make this payment within the time granted therein and therefore, that they have moved Ext.P5 application for extension; but that the same has not been considered until now. They, therefore, pray that Ext.P5 application be directed to be considered by the DRT within a time frame.

¶23

Pending this original petition, certain developments took place.

¶24

On 01.02.2019, the learned counsel for the petitioners volunteered to make payment of Rs.15 lakhs and prayed that the prayers in this writ petition be considered only upon them doing so. This matter was thereafter listed today and the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Rs.15 lakhs has been paid to the bank, which is affirmed by Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the

¶25

OP (DRT).No. 18 of 2019

¶26

¶27

learned standing counsel for the bank,.

¶28

In the afore circumstances, I asked Sri.P.C.Sasidharan whether his client would have any objection in this Court restoring the interim order earlier granted by the DRT through Ext.P4, since, even though belatedly, the petitioners have complied with the conditions imposed by the said order. The learned standing counsel very fairly conceded that since the petitioners have now paid Rs.15 lakhs, they are willing to await orders from the DRT before pursuing further action for recovery.

¶29

In the afore circumstances, I direct the respondent - bank not to take any further action pursuant to the measures taken by them under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act ('the SARFAESI Act') until such time as further orders are issued by the DRT.

¶30

This original petition is thus ordered.

¶31

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶32

stu

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

OP (DRT).No. 18 of 2019

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 10/12/2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SA NO.485/2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH ALL DOCUMENTS. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL PLEADINGS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DRT IN I.A.NO.144 OF 2019 IN SA NO.485/2018 DATED 21/01/2019. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF DRT ERNAKULAM DATED 20/12/2018 IN SA 485 OF 2018. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO. 145/2019 IN SA NO.485 OF 2018 FILED BEFORE THE DRT ERNAKULAM DATED 21/01/2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER TO PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 DATED 25/01/2019.

¶39

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶40

//TRUE COPY//

¶41

P.A TO JUDGE.

Jiju K.B. v. Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiju K.B. v. Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank Limited

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

Mathews George, Vs District Collector and District Magistrate

Anil.B.Menon Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

K.a.Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Reeja S.S. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Seema Saji, Vs the Authorized Officer, Kottayam Co-Operarive Urban Bank Limited

Beena Vasanthan Vs the Branch Manager