Kerala High Court
Thilakan B.Tharayil vs Canara Bank on 29 June, 2022
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
WP(C) NO. 15785 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
THILAKAN B.THARAYIL
AGED 63 YEARS
THARAYIL HOUSE, NADAVARAMBA P. O., IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR,
PIN-680661. REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
DEEPAK THILAKAN THARAYIL, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.THILAKAN,
THARAYIL HOUSE, NADAVARAMBA P. O., IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR,
PIN-680661.
BY ADV P.S.ABDUL KAREEM
RESPONDENTS:
1 CANARA BANK
IRINJALAKUDA BRANCH, KRISHNA BUILDING, TANA, IRINJALAKUDA,
THRISSUR, PIN-680121, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.
2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER
CANARA BANK, IRINJALAKUDA BRANCH, KRISHNA BUILDING, TANA,
IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR, PIN-680121.
3 CANARA BANK
ARM BRANCH, 2ND FLOOR, CANARA BANK BUILDING, CHITTOOR ROAD,
ERNAKULAM SOUTH, PIN-682016. , REP BY THE AUTHORISED OFFICER.
4 SHEENA SANTHOSH
W/O.LATE SANTHOSH T. B., THARAYIL HOUSE, NADAVARAMBA P. O.,
IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR, PIN-680661.
5 VISHNU SANTHOSH (MINOR)
S/O.LATE SANTHOSH T. B., THARAYIL HOUSE, NADAVARAMBA P. O.,
IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR, PIN-680661. REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN
SHEENA SANTHOSH,
6 LEKSHMI SANTHOSH (MINOR)
D/O.LATE SANTHOSH T. B., THARAYIL HOUSE, NADAVARAMBA P. O.,
IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR, PIN-680661. REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN
SHEENA SANTHOSH.
ADV. V.B HARINARAYANAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.15785/2022 -2-
JUDGMENT
Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by proceedings initiated
against the petitioner under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act to recover the amounts allegedly
due from the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1 st
respondent bank has fixed sale of the secured assets tomorrow (30-06-2022) and seeks for
a stay of such proceedings.
2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits
that the liability as on today is nearly Rs.5 Crores and no indulgence whatsoever can be
shown in the matter. It is submitted that the petitioner is a recalcitrant defaulter and is not
entitled to any discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing
Counsel for the bank, I am of the opinion that there is merit in the contention taken by the
learned standing counsel that the petitioner is not entitled to any discretionary relief under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed leaving
open the remedies of the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. If the
petitioner files securitization application within one week from today, the period during
which this writ petition was pending before this court namely from 10-05-2022 till 29-06-
2022 shall be excluded for the purpose of computing any period of limitation.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15785/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DULY EXECUTED BY
THE PETITIONER APPOINTING DEEPAK THILAKAN THARAYIL AS
HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 13.02.2020.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 1082 OF 2019
PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 14.01.2019.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 456 OF 2020
FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF THE CASE STATUS OF
O.A.NO. 456 OF 2020 OF THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II,
ERNAKULAM.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 31.03.2022.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
BANK TO THE PETITIONER DATED 18.5.2022
