Mini Ramankutty vs Authorized Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 8000 Ker

OP (DRT) NO. 291 OF 2022

                                1




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
   WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
                   OP (DRT) NO. 291 OF 2022
 (I.A NO.(ID NO.6047/2022), I.A NO(ID NO.6042/2022, I.A NO.
  (ID NO.6045/2022, I.A NO.(ID NO.6046/2022) IN DRC 4721 IN
        O.A 143/2016 BEFORE THE DRT - 1 AT ERNAKULAM)
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/DEFENDANT/CERTIFICATE DEBTORS:
          MINI RAMANKUTTY,
          AGED 54 YEARS,
          W/O LATE G. RAMANKUTTY, RESIDING AT SUNNY PALACE,
          FLAT NO.1206,CHANGAMPUZHA SAMADHI ROAD,
          EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM - 682 024.
          ALSO AT: SERINE POINT VILLA NO.2,
          CHCKOLAS HABITAT ,DIARY- METHANAM ROAD,
          KOONAMTHAI, EDAPPALLY, KERALA, PIN - 682 024.

            BY ADVS.
            P.S.SUJETH
            M.R.REENA


RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT/APPLICANT/CERTIFICATE HOLDER:
    1     THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
          FEDERAL BANK LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE,
          MARINE DRIVE ,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031.

     2      THE BRANCH MANAGER
            FEDERAL BANK LTD, PANANGADU BRANCH,
            ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 012.

     3      SRI.SUBRAMANYA SHARMA,
            FLAT NO.304, SUNNY PALACE,
            CHANGAMPUZHA SAMADHI ROAD,EDAPPALLY,
            ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 024.

            By SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE, SC


      THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (DRT) NO. 291 OF 2022

                                  2




                            JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been filed with the grievance that

despite the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P1 judgment, the

applications filed by the petitioner for setting aside the ex-parte

final order and for condonation of delay in filing the application for

setting aside the ex parte order have not been heard and decided

by the Tribunal. It is submitted that even without complying with

the directions contained in Ext.P1 judgment of this Court, the

Recovery Officer is now proceeding to bring to sale the properties

of the petitioner.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank

points out that as early as on 13.08.2020, the applications filed by

the petitioner for condonation of delay and for setting aside the

ex-parte order have been decided against him and places for my

consideration the order dated 13.08.2020 in M.A.Nos.177 and 178

of 2020 in O.A.No.143 of 2016.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that though he himself had appeared and argued the

matter before the Tribunal, he was not aware of the fact that the

orders had been passed on M.A.No.177 and 178 of 2020. The OP (DRT) NO. 291 OF 2022

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sale of the

petitioner's properties conducted on 19.05.2022 is clearly illegal as

it is beyond the period of three years provided for in Rule 67(B) of

the second schedule to the Income Tax Act.

4. The learned Standing Counsel points out that the

second schedule to the Income Tax Act has been amended and the

period now prescribed is seven years. It is submitted that the

period during which the regular proceedings of the Debts Recovery

Tribunal / Recovery Officer were suspended on account of Covid -

19 pandemic will also have to be excluded in determining the

period of limitation. I am of the view that the question of limitation

does not arise for consideration as the properties were sold on

19.05.2022 and the final order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal was

on 08.11.2016 and within the time prescribed by Rule 67(B)of the

second schedule to the Income Tax Act.

The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. The

petitioner may pursue any remedy that is available to the

petitioner before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE DK OP (DRT) NO. 291 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 291/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

ExhibitP1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP[DRT] 70/2020 DATED 8/6/2020, OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT

ExhibitP2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT WITH PETITION DATED 18/5/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DRT-1, TO SET-ASIDE THE EX- PARTE ORDER DATED 8/11/2016 IN OA 143/2016

ExhibitP3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT WITH PETITION DATED PETITION 18/5/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE DRT-1 AT ERNAKULAM TO CONDONE DELAY IN FILING THE ABOVE PETITION

ExhibitP4 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATED 18/5/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DRT-1

ExhibitP5 TRUE COPY OF THE URGENT MOVING PETITION DATED 18/5/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DRT-1PETITION BEFORE THE DRT-1

ExhibitP6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE RECOVERY OFFICER-1, TO PUT ON HOLD THE SALE SCHEDULED ON N19/5/2022, IN VIEW OF THE PENDENCY OF THE EXT- P2 TO EXT.P5 PETITIONS BEFORE THE DRT-1

ExhibitP7 TRUE COPY OF THE DAILY ORDER DATED ON 19/5/2022 IN THE PDF FORM, UPLOADED ONLY ON 2/6/2022 WHICH DOUNLODED FROM DRT-1 WEBSITE