Disposed

Prasad, v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC14 Jan 2020WP(C)/325/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, as legal heir to a deceased surety in a loan dispute, approached this Court seeking a writ of certiorari and quashing of proceedings against his mother's property. The Court disposed of the petition after the 1st respondent satisfied the apprehension that no such proceedings were contemplated against the surety's property.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition, having the matter resolved by the submission of the 1st respondent regarding no action against the surety's property, is disposed of.

Prasad, Vs the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 24TH POUSHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.325 OF 2020(M)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PRASAD, AGED 42 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN NADAR, VALIYAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, T.C.53/1011, ARUVACODE, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.V.MAHENDRANATH SRI.R.SYLESHWAREN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE TRIVANDRUM CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.

¶11

2 SUMA G.P., AGED 35, T.C.51/967(1), RESHMA HOUSE, GANGA NAGAR, PAPPANAMKODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695018.

¶12

BY ADVS. SMT.NISHA GEORGE, SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P(C). No. 325 of 2020

¶15

¶16

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶17

W.P(C). No. 325 of 2020

¶18

Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2020

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The prayers in the above writ petition (civil) are as follows:-

¶21

i) issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records regarding the loan granted to the 2^nd respondent.

¶22

ii) Since the 1^st respondent have acted in flagrant disregard of law and rules of procedure thereby having acted in violation of principles of natural justice, the whole proceedings culminating in M.C.452/2019 on the filed of the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram may be quashed.

¶23

iii) Grant such other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary to grant in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.

¶24

Heard Sri.V.Mahendranath, the learned counsel

¶25

appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Nisha George, the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent Thiruvananthapuram Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd.

¶26

The petitioner is the son of the surety, who had also offered her property as security in respect of the loan transaction entered into by the first respondent Thirvananthapuram

¶27

¶28

W.P(C). No. 325 of 2020

¶29

Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., with the 2^nd respondent borrower. The

¶30

said surety, who is the mother of the petitioner herein has subsequently died and the right of the deceased surety has devolved on the petitioner, who is her legal heir. The apprehension of the petitioner is that, on account of the default committed by the 2^nd respondent borrower, the 1^st respondent bank may proceed as against the said property of the petitioner's mother.

¶31

Smt.Nisha George, the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent Thiruvananthapuram Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., would submit on the basis of the instructions from the party that, the 1^st respondent has already proceeded as against the 2^nd respondent and has taken possession of the property, it is offered as security by the 2^nd respondent, who is the borrower and that the 1^st respondent will not proceed as against the property of the surety, who is the mother of the petitioner. Since that is the position of the 1^st respondent, the apprehension entertained by the petitioner appears to be without any factual foundation.

¶32

As regards the present loan transaction is concerned, the said submission of the 1^st respondent Thirvananthapuram

¶33

W.P(C). No. 325 of 2020

¶34

¶35

Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd is recorded. Accordingly, recording the abovesaid submission of the 1^st respondent, the above writ petition (civil) will stand disposed of.

¶36

Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶37

KAS

¶38

W.P(C). No. 325 of 2020

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE SECURED PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER.

¶43

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER.

¶44

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/05/2019 IN MC 452/2019 OF THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶45

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13/08/2019 IN WPC 22057/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶46

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶47

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Prasad, v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasad, v. the Trivandrum Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

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

Omana Syriac, Vs the Authorized Officer

Vasanthakumari T.K., Vs the Authorized Officer

Ummukulsu, Vs Federal Bank Limited

Baiju K.P. Vs the Branch Manager, Kozhikode District Co-Operative Bank

Divya, Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Bari Vs Kozhikode District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.