Disposed

Omanakuttan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Nov 2022WP(C)/18592/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment orders the 2nd respondent (a cooperative bank) to obtain a fresh valuation of mortgaged properties and consider permission for the petitioner to sell a portion of the property to settle loan dues based on that valuation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the bank to obtain fresh valuation of mortgaged properties and consider permission to sell a portion of the property for loan settlement.

Omanakuttan Vs State of Kerala — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 18592 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

OMANAKUTTAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI, SANTHOSH VIHAR (GS BHAVAN), THATTARKONAM CHERI, THRIKKOVILVATTAM VILLAGE THATTARKONAM PO, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 005.

¶8

BY ADVS. C.R.JAYAKUMAR NOBEL RAJU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001

¶11

2 THE SECRETARY, THE MAYYANAD REGIONAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 94, THATTAMALA PO, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 691 020.

¶12

BY ADV A.JANI(KOLLAM)

¶13

SMT. MABLE C. KURIAN, SR.GP.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) No. 18592 of 2022 2

¶16

T.R.RAVI, J.

¶17

 WP (C) No.18592 of 2022

¶18

 Dated this the 23rdday of November, 2022

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for the 1st
respondent. Standing Counsel takes notice for the 2nd
respondent.

¶21

2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the
2nd respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation and also grant
permission for sale of a property under mortgage and closure

¶22

of 4 loans by accepting appropriate undertaking from the
petitioner.

¶23

3. In Ext.P2, the petitioner has submitted that 2 items of
properties have been mortgaged in the Bank for obtaining the
loan and the entire extent may not be required for the purpose
of settling the dues to the 2nd respondent.

¶24

4. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is
disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to carry out valuation

¶25

WP(C) No. 18592 of 2022

¶26

of the properties which have been mortgaged and consider
whether sufficient properties can be permitted to be sold by the
petitioner for settling the amounts due to the petitioner. The
petitioner shall appear before the 2nd respondent on 30.11.2022
and the 2nd respondent shall take necessary steps for fresh
valuation. Based on the valuation, decision shall be taken
regarding the manner in which the loan should be wiped off by
sale of the portion of the properties.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

T.R.RAVI

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

sn

¶31

WP(C) No. 18592 of 2022
 4

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18592/2022

¶33

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶34

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSED MORTGAGED PROPERTY DEED NO.1376/2022 OF KANNANALLOOR SRO, KOLLAM Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.10.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶35

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

¶36

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Omanakuttan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omanakuttan v. State of Kerala

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

Prestige Estates Projects Limited Vs the Secretary

Johnson T.O Vs Irinjalakuda Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd.No.R 312

Sandhiavu Vs the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms)

Naseem Vs Vinod Kumar

Abdul Rahman Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Lotus, Vs the Tahsildar (Land Records)