The Single Appellate Court directed the Debt Recovery Tribunal to expeditiously consider the appellant's stay application challenging possession proceedings and deferred coercive measures for two weeks.
Coercive proceedings deferred for two weeks; DRT directed to consider stay application expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 25TH POUSHA, 1945
OP (DRT) NO. 10 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SA 734/2023 OF DEBT RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL- 2, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS IN S.A:
AGED 71 YEARS, W/O. G. MATHAI, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, NALLILA P.O.,
KOLLAM, PIN – 691515.
3 SABU VARGHESE
AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. VARGHESE, S.S. BHAVAN, NALLILA P.O., KOLLAM, PIN – 691515.
4 ASHA THOMAS AGED 37 YEARS CHARUVILA, PUTHEN VEEDU, NALLILA P.O., NEDUMPANA, KOLLAM, PIN – 691515.
5 SANJANA SYMON AGED 17 YEARS D/O. LATE SYMON MATHAI, (MINOR) CHARUVILA, PUTHEN VEEDU, NALLILA P.O., NEDUMPANA, KOLLAM PIN - 691515 REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER ASHA THOMAS.
6 ALWIN SYMON AGED 14 YEARS S/O. LATE SYMON MATHAI, (MINOR) CHARUVILA, PUTHEN VEEDU, NALLILA P.O., NEDUMPANA, KOLLAM PIN - 691515 REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ASHA THOMAS.
BY ADVS. B.J.JOHN PRAKASH P.PRAMEL COLIN ALEX
OP(DRT)No.10 of 2024
:2:
SOORAJ M.S. VARSHA VIJAYAKUMAR NAIR
RESPONDENT/DEFENDENTS IN S.A.:
STATE BANK OF INDIA (FORMERLY NON AS STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE) REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER, NALLILA BRANCH, KOLLAM, PIN – 691515.
BY ADV.SRI.TOM K.THOMAS
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(DRT)No.10 of 2024
:3:
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 15th day of January, 2024
The petitioners have challenged the measures initiated by
the respondent-Bank under the SARFAESI Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam filing S.A. No.734 of 2023. The petitioners had also filed a stay petition challenging the notice sent by the Advocate Commissioner appointed in M.C. No.196 of 2017, threatening to take physical possession on 27.12.2023.
issue a fresh notice dated 03.01.2024 to the petitioners,
OP(DRT)No.10 of 2024
:4:
threatening to take physical possession of the properties on 15.01.2024. The S.A. is posted to 19.01.2024. The petitioners have no other alternate remedy than approaching this Court, contend the Counsel for the petitioners.
In the facts of the case, the OP(DRT) is disposed of directing the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam to consider Ext.P7 stay application on 19.01.2024 or any other deferred date and pass appropriate orders thereon, expeditiously. Coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P3 will stand deferred for a period of two weeks.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ams
OP(DRT)No.10 of 2024
:5:
APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 10/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED IN M.C. NO. 196 OF 2017
Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 11.12.2023 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED IN MC NO. 196 OF 2017.
Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 03.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER APPOINTED IN MC NO. 196 OF 2017.
Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 15.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSET BASED SEARCH REPORTS OBTAINED FROM THE WEBSITE OF CENTRAL REGISTRY OF SECURITIZATION ASSET RECONSTRUCTION AND SECURITY INTEREST OF INDIA (CERSAI) BY THE PETITIONERS
Exhibit-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE S.A. NO. 734 OF 2023 WITHOUT ANNEXURES FILED BEFORE THE DRTII AT ERNAKULAM
Exhibit-P7
TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION I.A. NO. 4185 OF 2023 IN S.A. NO. 734 OF 2023 FILED BY THE APPLICANT BEFORE THE HON'BLE DRT-II AT ERNAKULAM.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Debts Recovery Tribunal should consider the stay application filed by the petitioners.
Whether coercive proceedings for possession should be deferred pending disposal of the stay petition.
Thankamma and Others
State Bank of India
N. NAGARESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
