K.R Shajan Joseph vs Branch Manager
2022 Latest Caselaw 7477 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
                        OP (DRT) NO. 282 OF 2022
        IN SA 244/2021 OF DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS:

    1      K.R SHAJAN JOSEPH,
           AGED 57 YEARS,S/O. LATE K.L. RAPHEL, PROPRIETOR,
           M/S. TIMBER GLASS HOUSE, KOMAROTH HOUSE,
           AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-682017.

    2      SHAINA SHAJAN,
           AGED 52 YEARS, W/O. K.R. SHAJAN JOSEPH,
           KOMAROTH HOUSE, AZAD ROAD,
           KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-682017.

           BY ADVS.    V.K.PEERMOHAMED KHAN
                       GIRISH KUMAR V.C
                       C.J.CHACKO



RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

    1      BRANCH MANAGER,
           INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,
           REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER,
           ERNAKULAM BRANCH, THEKKEKKARA MANSION,
           1ST FLOOR M.G ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682035.

    2      THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
           NDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, ERNAKLAM BRANCH,
           THEKKEKKARA MANSION, 1ST FLOOR, M.G ROAD,
           ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683035.



OTHER PRESENT:

           SRI. SUNIL SHANKAR (SC)


     THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 O.P(DRT).No.282/2022              2




                       JUDGMENT

This O.P.(DRT) was filed challenging the securitisation

proceedings initiated by the respondent Bank. Since it is

pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that

the Bank has already taken physical possession of the

secured asset and the total liabilities are in excess of Rs.4.5

Crores and there seems to be no agreement between the

parties regarding settlement of liabilities by paying the

amount in installments, I deem it appropriate to relegate

the petitioners to pursue their remedies before the Debts

Recovery Tribunal. However, I make it clear that if the

petitioners submit a proposal before the respondent Bank

for settlement of liabilities, the same shall be considered by

a competent authority of the respondent Bank. With this

observation, this O.P(DRT) is closed.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ats

APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 282/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED SECURITIZATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AS SA NO. 244/2021 BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, ALONG WITH ANNEXURES

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ADVANCE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION IN I.A. NO.

1446/2021 IN SA NO.244/2021 BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I ERNAKULAM

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DRT-I, ERNAKULAM DATED 26.05.2022 IN SA NO.244/2021

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 04.06.2022 FOR SETTLEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENT BANK

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS DATED 04.06.2022 SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF AMOUNTS TO THE RESPONDENT BANK