Kerala High Court
Pnb Housing Finance Limited vs Joy C Yohannan on 10 February, 2026
2026:KER:11842
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 21ST MAGHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
PNB HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED
ERNAKULAM BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR, RP ARCADE, SERVICE ROAD,
NEAR RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, PONNURUNNI, VYTTILLA,KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
PIN - 682019
BY ADVS.
SHRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN
SHRI.NELSON JOSEPH
SRI.M.D.JOSEPH
SHRI.DEEPAK ASHOK KUMAR
SHRI.JESWIN JACOB
RESPONDENTS:
1 JOY C YOHANNAN
AGED 54 YEARS, SON OF YOHANNAN,
CHIRIYANKANDATH HOUSE, ASHARIKODE P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680751
2 BINDU JOY
AGED 48 YEARS, SPOUSE OF JOY C YOHANNAN
CHIRIYANKANDATH HOUSE, ASHARIKODE P.O,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680751
3 THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THRISSUR
OUTPOST RD,AYYANTHOLE PO,THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
2026:KER:11842
WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026
2
BY ADV
GP. BINOY DAVIS, G.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:11842
WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a financial institution engaged in the business of providing housing loans to various persons. The grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this writ petition is against the proceedings that are pending before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur, as C.C No.750/2024, which was filed by the respondents 1 and 2, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, what is under challenge in the said complaint, is the steps the petitioner had initiated, by invoking the statutory rights available to the petitioner under the provision of the SARFAESI Act.
2. As of now, Ext.P4 interim order was passed by the District Commission, interdicting the petitioner from initiating any coercive proceedings against respondents 1 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 4 and 2, as part of recovery proceedings for realizing the loan availed by the said respondents. It is also pointed out that, the respondents 1 and 2 have already invoked their statutory remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act against the proceedings initiated against them by approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal and thus, parallel proceedings are in progress in respect of the very same cause of action.
3. Moreover, it is also the case of the petitioner that, since the recovery measures that are interdicted by the District Commission, were being continued on the strength of the statutory powers available to the petitioner as contemplated under SARFAESI Act, the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission should not have entertained the said complaint, as it does not have jurisdiction to decide such disputes. The petitioner submits that, this contention is 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 5 already raised in the reply version by the petitioner. Now Ext.P8 application has been submitted by the respondents 1 and 2, alleging that the petitioner had violated Ext.P4 interim order passed and therefore, they are liable to be prosecuted. The said application is now pending consideration. The learned Counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon Ext.P9 decision rendered in Federal Bank Ltd. v. Peeyar Exporters and Ors. [MANU/KE/2306/2021] to contend that, the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission cannot entertain a dispute in connection with the steps the bank has taken under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
4. I have heard Sri.Madhu Radhakrishnan, learned Counsel for the petitioner, who raised various contentions with regard to the lack of jurisdiction of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to entertain a complaint 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 6 regarding the matters relating to the recovery proceedings initiated under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
5. After carefully going through the records, I find that, this is a matter which the petitioner has to raise before the District Commission. Since the petitioner has a case that, the said Commission does not have the jurisdiction, the proper course open the petitioner is to submit an application raising it as a preliminary issue and to request the Commission to consider the question as a preliminary issue. Since the question of jurisdiction has not been decided by the District Commission so far, I am of the view that, it is not necessary to entertain this writ petition at this juncture.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, directing that, in case the petitioner is submitting an application raising the question of jurisdiction of the Consumer 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 7 Disputes Redressal Commission, to entertain the complaint in C.C. No.750/2024 as a preliminary issue, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered by the District Commission after hearing the respondents 1 and 2. Such consideration shall be made and orders shall be passed, before any further proceedings are initiated in Ext.P8 application. A decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of two months from the date of submission of the application.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE rpk/SCS 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 9/10/2024 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SYMBOLIC POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 12/3/2025 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11/11/2024 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT THRISSUR Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.1151/2024 IN CC NO. 750/2024 DATED 15/11/2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THRISSUR Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE VERSION DATED 25/2/2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE SA NO. 464/2025 (WITHOUT ANNEXURES) DATED 8/7/2025 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/7/2025 IN SA NO. 464/2025 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE EA NO.53/2025 IN CC NO. 750/2024 DATED 22/4/2025 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THRISSUR Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11/10/2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 12493/2021-FEDERAL BANK LTD. VS. PEEYAR EXPORTERS AND ORS.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29/7/2011 IN WPC NO. 5957/2011 IN PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. THE CONSUMER 2026:KER:11842 WP(C) NO. 4934 OF 2026 9 DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AND ORS Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED HON'BLE DIVISION BENCH IN WA NO.
1522/2015 - B. REGHU AND ORS. VS.
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE AND ORS DATED 31/7/2015