Kerala High Court
Leelamma Mathew vs The Authorised Officer on 2 November, 2021
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA,
1943
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SA 323/2019 OF DEBT
RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS:
1 LEELAMMA MATHEW
AGED 65 YEARS
D/O. LATE OUSEPH, PULIYAMTHOTTIYIL HOUSE,
KURUMALLOOR KARA, KANAKKARI VILLAGE, MEENACHIL
TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 632.
2 MRS.CHINNAMMA THOMAS
W/O. THOMAS, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, VELLAYAMKUDY
KARA, VELLAYAMKUDY P.O., PIN-685 515,
KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
3 SONY JOHN
S/O. K.P.LONAPPAN, KUREEKKAL HOUSE, VAIKOM
ROAD, THRIPPUNITHURA P.O., PIN-682 301,
THEKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.
4 JAMES LONAPPAN @ JAMES JOHN
S/O. K.P. LONAPPAN, KUREEKKAL HOUSE, VAIKOM
ROAD, THRIPPUNITHURA P.O., PIN-682 301,
THEKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.
5 LIJU SONY
W/O. MR. SONY, KUREEKKAL HOUSE, VAIKOM ROAD,
THRIPPUNITHURA P.O., PIN-682 301.
THEKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.
6 KUREEKKAL STEEL DISTRIBUTORS
MANAGING PARTNER, MRS. SONY JOHN, T.M.C. 20614,
VAIKOM ROAD, THRIPPUNITHURA P.O., KOCHI-682
301.
BY ADVS.
P.C.THOMAS
P.T.JUDY
RESPONDENT:
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,(REGIONAL OFFICE,
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
2
KOCHI), BANK OF BARODA, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 301.
BY ADVS.
NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
SAIJO HASSAN
BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
RAFEEK. V.K.
P.PARVATHY
AATHIRA SUNNY
NAZRIN HALLAJ
NASEEBA K.T.
S.SETHU LEKSHMI
SHILPA M.RAJAN
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
3
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
................................................
O.P.(DRT) NO.143 OF 2021
...........................................
Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2021
JUDGMENT
This original petition has been filed challenging
Ext.P5 auction sale notice dated 1/9/2021 issued by the
Bank.
2. Though the petitioners have raised a
contention that the property which was the subject
matter of the sale scheduled for 8/10/2021 is an
agricultural property, the learned counsel for the
respondent Bank points out that in Ext.P2 judgment of
the Debts Recovery Tribunal, rendered on 3/2/2021 had
clearly held as follows:
"16. In the instant matter, the
petitioners did not adduced any cogent
evidence as to the agricultural activity, if
any, carried on in the secured assets at
the time of creation of security interest;
and that no documents have been
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
produced to show that the applicant is
having agricultural income from the said
lands, not any statement to show that he
had incurred expenses and charges in
connection with the agricultural activities.
Neither the report filed by the Advocate
Commissioner nor Annexure-A2 and A4
certificate dated 29.10.2019 issued by the
Agricultural Officer would prove that the
properties in the tender possession
notices dated 25.10.2019 and 19.10.2019
are agricultural lands at the time of
creation of security interest.
17. In the above circumstance, in the
absence of any relevant material to show
that agricultural activities had been
periodically carried out by the petitioners
in the secured assets at the time of
creation of security interest over the
same, the contention of the petitioners
that the properties in the tender
possession notices dated 25.10.2019 and
19.10.2019 are agricultural lands cannot
be accepted. As such, by no stretch of
imagination, the secured assets can be
considered as agricultural lands so as to
exclude the lands from the purview of the
Act, and the claim of the applicant is quite
misconceived."
3. In view of the above, the contention of the
petitioners that the property involved in the securitisation
proceedings is an agricultural property is strongly denied
by the learned counsel for the respondent Bank.
4. Be that as it may, it is submitted that
pursuant to Ext.P5 notice for sale, no bidders appeared
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
and hence the sale did not take place. Accordingly,
recording the aforesaid submission that sale did not take
place, this original petition is closed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJM
OP (DRT) NO. 143 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 143/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED SA
NO.323/2019 WITHOUT DOCUEMNTS, PENDING
BEFORE DRT-II, ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.2.2020
OF DRT DISMISSING THE STAY PETITION
(IA NO.1673/2019)
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED
7.1.2020 OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSION
WITHOUT DOCUMENTS STATING THAT LAND IN
QUESTION IS AGRICULTURAL LAND.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 6.1.2020
OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
ATHIRAMPUZHA-STATING THAT LAND IN
QUESTION IS AGRICULTURAL LAND.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.9.2021
ISSUED BY THE BANK INTIMATING THE E-
AUCTION OF THE PROPERTY OF THE IST
PETITIONER WOULD BE CONDUCTED ON
8.10.2021 AT 2 P.M.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.1209/2021 DATED
20-09-21 IN SA NO.323/19 FOR AMENDMENT
OF SA NO.323/19, WITHOUT ANNEXURE.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.1210/2021 IN
SA NO.323/19 FOR STAYING AUCTION,
FILED ON 20.9.2021.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.1208/2021 IN SA
NO.323/19 FOR ADVANCING THE CASE FROM
23.12.2021 FILED ON 20.9.2021.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL
AJM //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
