Kerala High Court
Viju P.V vs Canara Bank on 15 September, 2009
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY,THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/14TH MAGHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 30313 of 2013 (L)
----------------------------
IA.NO. 902/2012 OF DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
1. VIJU P.V, AGED 35 YEARS,S/O R. VIKRAMAN,
PUTHUSSERIL HOUSE, EDACOCHI VILLAGE,
KOCHI- 682 006, PROPRIETOR, MARINE VENTURES,KOCHI.
2. P.V. VALSALA DEVI, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
W/O T. NANDAKUMAR, PADINJATTEDATH HOUSE, VENNALA,
KOCHI -682 028, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. CANARA BANK,
ABODY CORPORATE DULY CONSTITUTED
UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES
(ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT 1970,
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF MANAGER,
ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH, RAVIPURAM,
ERNAKULAM- 682 011
2. DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, MALAYALA MANORAMA JUNCTION,
PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -682 011,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
3. THE RECOVERY OFFICER,
DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
MALAYALA MANAORAMA JUNCTION, PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -682 036
4. DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
4TH FLOOR, INDIAN BANK CIRCLE OFFICE, 55,
ETHIRAJ SALAI, CHENNAI- 600 008,
REPRESETED BY ITS MANAGER.
R1 BY SRI.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN,SC, BANK
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 03-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).No. 30313 of 2013 (L)
------------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE EX- PARTE FINAL ORDER DATED 15-09-2009 IN
O.A. NO. 319 OF 2008
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IA. NO. 2510 OF 2009 TO SET ASIDE
EXT P1 EX-PARTE ORDER
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30-09-2010 IN I.A NO. 2510
OF 2010
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09-09-2010 IN
WPC. NO. 26228 OF 2010
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02-07-2012 IN IA NO 2510 OF 2009
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNNUMBERED APPEAL
BEFORE THE DRAT, CHENNAI
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR STAY I.A NO. 903 OF 2012
BEFORE DRAT, CHENNAI
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR WAIVER I.A NO. 902 OF 2012
BEFORE DRAT, CHENNAI
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCLAMATION OF SALE NO.DRC 3113 DATED
07-10-2013
EXHIBIT P10 ATRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05-12-2013 PUBLISHED IN
WEBSITE OF THE DRAT CHENNAI
EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05-10-2013
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO.JUDGE
sts
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P.(C)No. 30313 OF 2013
.........................................................................
Dated this the 3rd February, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have approached this Court with the following prayers:
"1. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders calling for the records leading upto Ext.P9 and quash Ext.P9/proclamation of sale;
2. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders calling for the records leading upto Ext.P10 and quash Ext.P10;
3. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, directions or orders directing 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P11/representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
4. to grant such other reliefs which are deem just and proper in the nature of this case.
5. To award the cost of the petitioner's for these proceedings."
2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 09.12.2013, the following order was passed:
"Admit. Standing Counsel takes notice for R1. Notice to R2 to R4 dispensed with for the time W.P.(C)No. 30313 OF 2013 2 being. The sale of the property slated on 10.12.2013 shall go on. But the same shall not be confirmed without obtaining orders from this Court."
Subsequently when the matter came up for consideration on 31.01.2014, the following order was passed :
"The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent Bank submits that the petitioner has already approached the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), being aggrieved of Ext.P5 order passed by the DRT and other consequential proceedings. It is stated that pursuant to the interim order passed by the DRAT, the sale stands adjourned to 11.02.2014, but the amount directed to be satisfied by the petitioner on or before 31.01.2014 has not been paid till date. The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks for time to confirm the position.
Post on 03.02.2014."
3. The learned Counsel for the respondent Bank asserts that no amount has been deposited by the petitioner inspite of the clear direction given by the DRAT and adjournment of the sale to 11.02.2014.
W.P.(C)No. 30313 OF 2013 3 No instruction is forthcoming from the part of the petitioners. This Court finds that this is not a fit case to call for interference . Interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE lk