O.P(DRT).337/22 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
OP (DRT) NO. 337 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTSA 352/2018 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:
REJI. M . P
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. PAULOSE
663-P, 1ST FLOOR
SREELAKSHMI COMPLEX
STATUE JUNCTION, TEMPLE ROAD
TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM
, PIN - 682301
BY ADVS.
SADCHITH.P.KURUP
C.P.ANIL RAJ
ANCY RUBENS
RESPONDENT/S:
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD.,
ERNAKULAM DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
2ND FLOOR, K.C. CENTRE,
OPP. NORTH POLICE STATION,
KACHERIPADY, CHITTOOR ROAD,
ERNAKULAM
, PIN - 682018
OTHER PRESENT:
0
ADV. P.S. GEORGE (SC)
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P(DRT).337/22 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this court being aggrieved by the fact that without granting a reasonable time to the petitioner to challenge the order passed in I.A.No.1607 of 2022 in S.A.No.352 of 2018, on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Ernakulam, the respondent bank is proceeding to take physical possession of the secured asset. It is submitted that a reasonable time may be granted to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal challenging the order passed on the aforesaid interlocutory application. It is also pointed out that this court had granted an interim order protecting the petitioner from dispossession till today.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank also.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the petitioner is not residing in the property in question and it is actually in the possession of the tenants. It is submitted that there is clear suppression of material facts and the petitioner is not entitled to any indulgence whatsoever. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner made a belated application for a copy of the order on the IA, , after filing the original petition.
4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the limited nature of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner, this original petition is disposed of directing that the interim order granted on O.P(DRT).337/22 3 19.8.2022 will continue for a period of 3 weeks from today to enable the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal against the order in I.A. 1607 of 2022 in S.A. 352 of 2018 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Ernakulam. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter and it is for the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal to consider the matter, on merits, in accordance with law.
This original petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE okb/ //True copy// P.S. to Judge O.P(DRT).337/22 4 APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 337/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SA NO. 352/2018 DATED 27/08/2018 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE DRT 1 ERNAKULAM WITHOUT ANNEXURES Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF IA NO. 1606/2022 IN SA NO.
352/2018 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE DRT 1, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF IA NO. 1607/2022 IN SA NO.
352/2018 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE DRT 1, ERNAKULAM