M/S. Leo Tourism And Lifespace ... vs The Authorised Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 9631 Ker

                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
                         WP(C) NO. 3387 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

          M/S. LEO TOURISM AND LIFESPACE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE
          LIMITED,
          REGD. OFFICE AT DOOR NO. 14/497, LEO GROUP, SOUTH
          CHELLANAM P.O. COCHIN 682 008.
          AND CORPORATE OFFICES AT 41/2210, LEO GROUP, VEEKSHNAM
          ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 018 REPRESENTED BY ITS
          DIRECTOR ABEL P. GEORGE.
          BY ADV NISHA JOHN


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
          CHIEF MANAGER, CSB BANK LIMITED,
          (FORMERLY THE CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LIMITED),
          ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, VALANJAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM SOUTH
          KOCHI 682 016.
    2     THE MANAGER,
          CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LIMITED, MARKET ROAD, BRANCH,
          ERNAKULAM 682 020.
          BY ADV MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 3387 OF 2022                    2



                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court, being aggrieved

by the proceedings initiated by the respondent Bank under

the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

for recovery of the amounts due from the petitioner under

under an overdraft facility availed from the respondent bank.

2. This writ petition was admitted on 01.02.2022 and

a conditional interim order was granted to the petitioner.

The petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/-

(Rupees one crore only) in instalments as a condition for

stay. The time for payment was subsequently extended. It is

however, not in disputed before me that the entire amount of

Rs.1,00,00,000/- has been remitted by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner may be given some time to place

a proposal for settlement of liabilities before the respondent

bank.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank

submits that S.A. No.187 of 2021 is pending before the

Debts Recovery Tribunal Ernakulam at the instance of the

petitioner and all contentions of the petitioner can be

considered in that application. It is submitted that this writ

petition was filed at a time when there was no regular sitting

before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam and there

is no need for a parallel adjudication of the claims raised by

the petitioner.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case and considering the fact that the petitioner has

remitted an amount of One Crore rupees as directed by this

Court while granting the interim order (though belatedly), I

dispose of this writ petition directing that status quo as on

today shall be maintained for a period of two weeks to

enable the petitioner to seek appropriate reliefs, interim or

final, from the Tribunal in the pending Securitisation

Application. I make it clear that I have not expressed any

opinion on the merits of the matter and it will be open to the

Tribunal to decide the matter in accordance with law.

sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ajt

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3387/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 13 (2) DATED 12.04.2021.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION DATED 26.07.2013 ISSUED BY KRLCBC.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 16/07/2014 EXECUTED BETWEEN KRLCBC AND RESPONDENT BANK.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30.11.2021 IN OP (DRT) NO. 268/2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT BANK DATED 27/1/2022.