Disposed

Saneesh Kumar M, v. the District Collector

Kerala HC30 Mar 2023WP(C)/11327/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's Section 72 application under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act after issuing notice to relevant parties, while deferring coercive recovery proceedings for one month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the application within one month after notice; coercive proceedings deferred till then.

Saneesh Kumar M, Vs the District Collector — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 11327 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

SANEESH KUMAR M,
MANHERIKKANDI HOUSE,ASHOKA MANDIRAM,
AZHIKKAL, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670009
BY ADVS.
V.PREMCHAND
SURYA MOHAN P.
HALIYA T.P.

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIIVIL STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT,, PIN - 670001

¶9

2 THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KANNUR TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN - 670001

¶10

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, AZHEEKODE NORTH VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670009

¶11

4 THE CANARA BANK, SME BRANCH, THEZHUKKIL PEEDIKA,KANNUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER., PIN – 670001

¶12

R BY GP SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN
R4 BY GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 11327 OF 2023 ..2..

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner, who is a proprietor of a firm by name MK Enterprises, which is a Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME), had availed a loan from the 4^th respondent Bank, which fell in arrears. Pursuant to the default, the 2^nd respondent has issued Exts.P1 to P4 demand notices to the petitioner under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The petitioner, then, filed Ext.P5 application before the 1^st respondent under Section 72 of the Act. The limited prayer of the petitioner at this stage is for the disposal of Ext.P5 application filed before the 1^st respondent.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent.

¶18

WP(C) NO. 11327 OF 2023 ..3..

¶19

In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will

¶20

be a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P5 application, after notice to the petitioner and the 4^th respondent and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, all further coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand deferred. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with the certified copy of the judgment before the 1^st respondent.

¶21

The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction.

¶22

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶23

¶24

WP(C) NO. 11327 OF 2023 ..4..

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

`PETITIONER E`	`XHIBITS`
`Exhibit1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.09.2022` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ISSUED IN RESPECT` `OF LOAN NO. 39817170002`
`Exhibit2`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.09.2022` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT LOAN NO.` `3981768000000236`
`Exhibit3`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.09.2022` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT LOAN NO.` `39817550000041`
`Exhibit-P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.09.2022` `ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT LOAN NO.` `3981261000104.`
`Exhibit-P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE` `PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 72 OF THE KERALA` `REVENUE RECOVERY ACT. DATED 09.01.2023 FILED BY` `THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit-P6`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 07.03.2023` `SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE` `ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK`

Saneesh Kumar M, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saneesh Kumar M, v. the District Collector

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

Sukumaran K.C. Vs Reliance General Insurance Company

Jayan a K Vs the Principal Secretary

Reshma S. Vijay Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Muhammed Enoli Vs Shailaja

Devasia E.K., Vs the Permanent Lok Adalath

Biniya Vs State of Kerala