Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Kerala High Court
Jayesh.T.J vs The Authorized Officer on 23 May, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 18368 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
JAYESH.T.J
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O JAYASENAN, RESIDING AT THAIPARAMBATH HOUSE,
KATTUNGACHIRA. P. O, IRINJALAKKUDA VILLAGE,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680125
BY ADVS.
P.S.SUJETH
M.R.REENA
HARRY GEORGE N.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, BROADWAY,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682031
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER,
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KURUPPAM ROAD BRANCH,
P.B. NO. 8, THRISSUR THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680001
SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.18368 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024 The petitioner, who has availed a financial assistance from the Punjab National Bank and who is facing coercive proceedings under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, has approached this Court seeking to declare that the initiation of recovery proceedings under Section 14 of the Act, 2002 without giving an opportunity to prefer a statutory appeal to the petitioner, is illegal. The petitioner seeks an interim order directing the respondents to keep in abeyance further recovery proceedings to enable the petitioner to prefer statutory appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
2. Standing Counsel representing the respondents submits that the order under Section 14 of the Act, 2002 WP(C) No.18368 of 2024 3 sought to be challenged by the petitioner was passed in the year 2022. The petitioner had ample time to file appeal. A writ petition for grant of time to prefer an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, need not be entertained.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that if the petitioner gets a breathing time of one month, the petitioner will be able to pay off the entire liability. According to the petitioner, an NRI has approached the petitioner for purchasing his property and sale agreement has already been entered into. This Court may direct the Bank to defer any coercive proceedings for a period of one month, so that the petitioner can clear the entire liability.
4. Heard.
5. The order sought to be impugned by the petitioner before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, has been passed in the year 2022. The petitioner has applied for a certified copy of the order only very recently. In the circumstances of the case, WP(C) No.18368 of 2024 4 I am not inclined to grant time to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Even without grant of any time by this Court, the petitioner can approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. As regards the contention of the petitioner that he is ready to sell his property and wipe off the liability, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Bank producing the sale agreement. If the Bank is convinced of the bona fides of the petitioner in the matter of sale of property, the Bank may take appropriate decision accordingly.
The writ petition is disposed of with the afore observations.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.18368 of 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18368/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P (C) NO. 1204 OF 2022, DATED 22-09-2022 OF THE HON'BLE COURT Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27-06- 2023 ISSUED BY THE ASST. GENERAL MANAGER OF THE RESPONDENT BANK Exhibit -P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS SHOWING THE AMOUNT REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED-
16-02-2023 SUBMITTED TO THE BANK AUTHORITY.