Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5078 Ker
Judgement Date : 11 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 22ND MAGHA,1942
OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SA 349/2019 OF DEBT RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:
STATE BANK OF INDIA,
STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, 7TH FLOOR, VANKARATH
TOWERS, PALARIVATTOIM BYPASS JUNCTION, KOCHI 682 024
BY ADVS.
SMT.S.LAKSHMY
SMT.S.AMINA
SMT.RENI JAMES
SRI.S.SHAFEEKA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 1,
5TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM
KOCHI 682 036
DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
2 THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - 2,
1ST FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 036
DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
3 M/S. AMMA WOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,
KOTTUNGAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, KODANNUR P.O,
THRISSUR 680 683
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SULEKHA K V
4 SHIJI M R,
AGED 47 YEARS,
W/O. SALEESH K.S, BUSINESS, KOPTTUNGAL HOUSE, PARALAM
P.O, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, THRISSUR 680 683
5 SALEESH K.S,
S/O. KOTTUNGAL SREEDHARAN, AGED 52 YEARS, BUSINESS,
KOTTUNGAL HOUSE, PARALAM P.O, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE,
THRISSUR 680 683
6 SULEKHA K V,
OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
2
AGED 41 YEARS,
W/O. AJAYAN K S, BUSINESS, KOTTUNGAL HOUSE,
VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, PALARAM P.O, THRISSUR 680 683
7 MRIDUL SREEDHAR,
AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O. SALEESH K S, BUSINESS, KOTTUNGAL HOUSE,
PARALAM P.O, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, , VENGINISSERI
TALUK, THRISSUR 680 683
8 NIVEDHYA K.S,,
AGED 27 YEARS,
S/O. SALEESH K.S, BUSINESS, KOTTUNGAL HOUSE,
PARALAM P.O, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, , VENGINISSERI
TALUK, THRISSUR 680 683
9 AJAYAN K.S,
AGED 47 YEARS,
S/O. KOTTUNGAL SREEDHARAN,BUSINESS, KOTTUNGAL
HOUSE, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, , PARALAM
P.O,VENGINISSERI TALUK, THRISSUR 680 683
10 SURESH BABU,
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. KOTTUNGAL S,REEDHARAN, BUSINESS, KOTTUNGAL
HOUSE, VENGINISSERI VILLAGE, , PARALAM P.O,
THRISSUR 680 683
11 MOHANAN K M,
AGED 57 YEARS,
S/O. KUPPATHIL MADHAVAN, BUSINESS, KUPPATHIL HOUSE,
KODAKARA VILLAGE, CHALAKKUDY TALUK, KANAKAMALA P.O,
PIN 680 589
12 SUNITHA MOHANAN,
AGED 46 YEARS,
W/O. MOHAN K.M, KUPPATHIL HOUSE, KODAKARA VILLAGE,
CHALAKKUDY TALUK, KANAKAMALA P.O, PIN 680 589
13 M O JOJU,
AGED 47 YEARS,
S/O. OUSEPH, BUSINESS, MAROKY HOUSE, CHOVOOR
VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK
14 JOSE JOSEPH,
AGED 58 YEARS,
S/O. P M JOSEPH, AGRICULTURAL WORK, PULIKKAN HOUSE,
EERATTUPETTA, THALAPPALAM, KARAYIL PLASANAN,
KOTTAYAM P.O PIN 686 579
OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
3
R1 & R2 BY THUSHARA JAMES, GP
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
4
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 11th day of February 2021
Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.
The unusual prayer in this petition is to direct the 1 st
respondent Debt Recovery Tribunal-1 to recall
S.A.No.349/2019 posted before Debt Recovery Tribunal-2,
Ernakulam, and to pronounce the judgment in a
prescribed time frame.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that,
record of S.A.No.349/2019 is volumnous and it will not
be possible to transmit the record to Debt Recovery
Tribunal, Bangalore. Therefore, according to learned
Counsel for the petitioner, as hearing of
S.A.No.349/2019 was conducted before the Debt Recovery
Tribunal-2, Ernakulam, by the incharge Presiding
Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal-1, Ernakulam, the S.A
be decided by the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery
Tribunal-1, Ernakulam, who has heard the matter.
3. It is seen that, with passage of time, now
charge of the post of Debt Recovery Tribunal-2,
Ernakulam, is with the Presiding Officer of Debt OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
Recovery Tribunal-2, Bangalore. This charge has been
entrusted by the Under Secretary, Government of India,
vide notification dated 04.01.2021 (Ext.P2). In this
view of the matter, directing the 1st respondent Debt
Recovery Tribunal-1, Ernakulam, to recall
S.A.No.349/2019 from the files of Debt Recovery
Tribunal-2, Ernakulam, the charge of which is with the
Debt Recovery Tribunal-2, Bangalore, would amount to
violation of notification dated 04.01.2021. The 1 st
respondent cannot be directed to act contrary to the
notification dated 04.01.2021.
In this view of the matter, the petition is devoid
of merits and the same is rejected. However, it is
made clear that the petitioner is free to approach the
concerned administrative authority for seeking relief
of transfer of proceedings of S.A.No.349/2019.
Sd/-
A.M.BADAR
JUDGE
uu
11.2.2021 OP (DRT).No.7 OF 2021
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE B DIARY PROCEEDINGS IN S.A NO 349/2019 DATED 21-12-2020
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION F.NO.
7/1/2019-DRT DATED 04-01-2021 ISSUED BY UNION OF INDIA.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!