Kerala High Court
WP(C)/42073/2017 of TOMY MATHEW Vs DHANLAZMI BANK on 29 December 2017
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 42073 of 2017 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ TOMY MATHEW, AGED 58, S/O. MATHEW, MADAPALLYMATTOM HOUSE,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 42073 of 2017 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
TOMY MATHEW, AGED 58, S/O. MATHEW, MADAPALLYMATTOM HOUSE, MOOZHUR P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
BY ADVS.SRI.SANIL JOSE SRI.NIXON PAUL
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. DHANLAXMI BANK, COTTON HILL, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM - 10, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM - 10, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER.
2. DHANALAXMI BANK, AYARKUNNAM BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
3. MATHEW THOMAS, S/O. THOMAS,
M/S THIRUNILATHIL RUBBER TRADERS, THIRUNILATHIL HOUSE, PADUVA P.O., AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM - 686 564. THIRUNILATHIL HOUSE, PADUVA P.O., AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM - 686 564.
R1 & R2 BY SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN,SC,DHANALAKSHMI BANK
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.03.2017 IN W.A. NO. 589/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT THIS HON'BLE COURT
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.11.2017 IN S.A. NO. 118/2017, DRT-2, ERNAKULAM. ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE A.I.R. NO. 840/2017 IN UNNUMBERED APPEAL NO..../2017, DRAT, CHENNAI. NO..../2017, DRAT, CHENNAI.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE I.A. NO...../2017 IN A.I.R. NO. 840/2017 IN UNNUMBERED APPEAL NO...../2017, DRAT, CHENNAI. APPEAL NO...../2017, DRAT, CHENNAI.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL
---------------------------------------- // True copy //
hmh
PA to Judge
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.42073 OF 2017
----------------------------------
Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andSri.C.K.Karunakaran, the learned counsel appearing on behalfof the respondents. I do not propose to issue notice to the 3[rd]respondent in view of the directions that I intend to make inthis judgment.
2. The writ petition has been filed with several reliefs.However, during the hearing of this matter the learned counselappearing for the petitioner confined his prayer that he begiven some time to prosecute the statutory appeal pendingbefore the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.According to him even though the appeal has been numbered,the DRAT, Chennai has not taken up the same for considerationor to issue orders thereon.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Banksays that this submission is not fully accurate because even thepleadings would show that the appeal, filed by the petitioner W.P.(C) NO.42073/ 2017 2
before the DRAT, Chennai, has not been numbered. He saysthat this is possibly because the appeal has been filed withsome defect or delay and he says that the attempt of thepetitioner is only to obtain more time. The learned StandingCounsel further submits that this is the 4[th] round of litigationand he prays that no further latitude be shown to thepetitioner.
4. I have considered the submissions of the learnedcounsel on either side. Since the petitioner says that he hasalready filed an appeal before the DRAT, Chennai, I am of theview that it is only in equity and fairness that he be allowed abreathing time so as to have his appeal numbered andconsidered by the DRAT, Chennai. According to the learnedcounsel appearing for the petitioner, a time of 7 days would besufficient so as to enable him to have the appeal numberedand move for admission and orders. Taking this submissioninto account, I deem it appropriate to give him another oneweek than prayed for by him, so as to factor in any unseeneventuality in future and thus to allow the petitioner time till15.01.2018 to have his appeal got numbered and heard by theDRAT, Chennai.
W.P.(C) NO.42073/ 2017 3
In such circumstances and for the reasons afore, I orderthis writ petition directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to takefurther coercive action under the provisions of theSecuritisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets andEnforcement of Security Interest Act until 15.01.2018. If thepetitioner is not able to obtain any orders from the DRAT,Chennai, on or before 15.01.2018, the Bank will be at libertyto initiate and continue proceedings under the provisions ofSARFAESI Act without any impediment on account of thisjudgment.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
IAP