Dismissed

John Varghese v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Kerala HC23 Sept 2019WA/1920/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal challenging a Writ Petition against HDFC Ltd. The High Court held that the writ petition could not be entertained as an effective statutory remedy was available with the Debt Recovery Tribunal against the sale conducted under the SARFAESI Act.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal dismissed; submission regarding furnishing details of the bidder recorded.

John Varghese Vs Housing Development Finance Corporation… — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 1ST ASWINA, 1941

¶7

WA.No.1920 OF 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)16206/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 17.6.2019

¶9

APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

¶10

1 JOHN VARGHESE, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. T. J. VARGHESE, THAKKIDIYEL HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM, MANTHURUTHY P.O., CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM - 42.

¶11

2 BINDU JOHN, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. JOHN VARGHESE, THAKKIDIYEL HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM, MANTHURUTHY P.O., CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM - 42.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN SMT.G.N.DEEPA

¶13

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, HDFC HOUSE, P.O.NO.1667, RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI - 15.

¶15

2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER (APPOINTED UNDER THE SARFAESI ACT 2002 AND RULES), HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, HDFC HOUSE, P. O. NO.1667, RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, M. G. ROAD, KOCHI - 15.

¶16

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.) R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.S.AMBILY R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.NAMITHA NAMBIAR R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI THOMAS R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.MICKY THOMAS

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.A.No.1920 of 2019

¶19

¶20

C.K.Abdul Rehim, Acting C.J. &

¶21

R.Narayana Pisharadi, J.

¶22

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶23

W.A.No.1920 of 2019

¶24

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 23^rd day of September, 2019

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

C.K.Abdul Rehim, Acting C.J.

¶27

The appellants are the writ petitioners in W.P.(C)No.16206 of 2019. They are challenging the judgment of the single Judge

¶28

dated 17.6.2019. The respondents herein are the respondents in the Writ Petition.

¶29

The Writ Petition was filed seeking direction against the 1^st respondent to permit the appellants to repay the liabilities due, and also seeking direction for reconveyance of the secured assets sold in auction, on accepting payment of an amount to the tune of Rs.6.50 Crores. The learned single Judge found that the proceeding initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 was once challenged before this court in a Writ Petition, unsuccessfully. It was noticed that a

¶30

W.A.No.1920 of 2019

¶31

¶32

Writ Appeal filed from that judgment was also dismissed. Finding that the appellants have got a statutory remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the Writ Petition was dismissed.

¶33

Heard; learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.K.K.Chandran Pillai, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶34

We do not find any illegality, error or impropriety in the judgment impugned, because there is availability of an effective statutory remedy against the sale conducted by the respondents. Hence the Writ Petition filed by the appellants cannot be entertained. Therefore we are inclined to confirm the impugned judgment.

¶35

However, learned counsel for the appellants made a submission that despite a request made to the respondents to furnish details of the bidder to whom the secured assets were sold, in order to facilitate the appellants to take up the statutory remedies available, the bank has not furnished such details. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that if any such request is received, those details can be furnished. The above

¶36

W.A.No.1920 of 2019

¶37

¶38

submission is recorded.

¶39

Subject to the submission recorded as above, the Writ Appeal is hereby dismissed.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

C.K.Abdul Rehim, Acting Chief Justice

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

R.Narayana Pisharadi, Judge

¶44

vpv

¶45

/TRUE COPY/

¶46

P.A. TO JUDGE

John Varghese v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

John Varghese v. Housing Development Finance Corporation 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

M/S. Vijaya Hospitality and Resports Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

The Chairman, Indira Charitable Trust, Vs State of Kerala

Pankajavally P.K. Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Southern Dredging Company (P) Ltd. Vs Secretary to Government