Babu Sankaran vs Canara Bank
2021 Latest Caselaw 17883 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
  WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 10TH BHADRA, 1943
                        OP (DRT) NO. 50 OF 2021
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SA 111/2021 OF DEBTS RECOVERY
                        TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/APPLICANT:

          BABU SANKARAN
          VELIVADAKKATHIL,
          PULLIKANAKKU P.O,
          KAYAMKULAM PIN 690 502
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.V.K.PEER MOHAMED KHAN
          SHRI.GIRISH KUMAR V.C


RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

    1     CANARA BANK
          REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
          KAYAMKULAM BRANCH, W-13,
          HOUSE NO. 301, THAYYIL BUILDING,
          K.P ROAD, KAYAMKULAM 690 502
    2     THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
          CANARA BANK, W-13, HOUSE NO. 301,
          THAYYIL BUILDING, K.P ROAD,
          KAYAMKULAM 690 502
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC
          SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
          SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
          SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
          SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
          SRI.RAJA KANNAN



      THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 O.P.(DRT) No.50/21                 -:2:-




                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of September, 2021

The relief claimed in this original petition relates to Ext.P2

amendment petition pending consideration before the Debt Recovery

Tribunal-II, Ernakulam.

2. Petitioner submitted that since DRT-II, Ernakulam was not

functioning, the said amendment petition could not be considered

and hence the petitioner was compelled to invoke the jurisdiction of

this Court. It was submitted across the Bar by the learned counsel

appearing on both sides that now the charge of DRT-II, Ernakulam

has been handed over to DRT-I, Ernakulam by a recent notification.

3. I am satisfied that there is no impediment in considering

Ext.P2 application by the Tribunal now in charge. Accordingly, there

will be a direction to the DRT-in-charge of S.A. No.111 of 2021,

before the DRT-II, Ernakulam to take up the application for

amendment, produced herein as Ext.P2 and dispose of the same, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months

from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

4. I take note of the submission of the learned counsel for the

respondents that the amendment petition has become infructuous.

However whether the application has become infructuous or not is a

matter to be considered by the DRT-in-charge, while passing orders

upon the amendment petition.

The original petition is disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE vps

APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 50/2021

PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS SA NO. 111/2021 BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM ALONG WITH ANNEXURES.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT PETITION IN UN NUMBERED I.A OF 2021 IN SA NO 111/2021