Geetha vs The Quilon Cooperative Urban Bank ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4854 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
     THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1945
                         WP(C) NO. 13756 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

              GEETHA
              AGED 65 YEARS
              W/O PUSHKARAN,JISHALAYAM,DECENT JUNCTION.PO, CHENTHAPOOR,
              KOLLAM - 691577.

              BY ADV K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR)


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE QUILON COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD 960, CHINNAKKADA,
              KOLLAM - 691051, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
     2        PRATHAPACHANDRAN
              AGED 43 YEARS
              S/O RAMACHANDRAN,THEKKEDATHU, KRISHNAKRIPA,
              MYTHRINAGAR 108, PATTHANAM.PO., KOLLAM - 691021.
     3        ASWANI SASIKUMAR
              AGED 37 YEARS
              W/O PRATHAPACHANDRAN,THEKKEDATHU KRISHNAKRIPA,
              MYTHRINAGAR 108, PATTATHANAM.PO., KOLLAM - 691021.


              SMT. D. P. RENU. SC.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 13756 OF 2023

                                       2

                                T.R. RAVI, J.
                --------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C) No.13756 of 2023
                    --------------------------------------------
                Dated this the 13th day of April, 2023

                               JUDGMENT

Admit. Standing Counsel takes notice for the 1st

respondent. Notice to respondents 2 and 3 is dispensed with.

2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the secured

asset and submits that it was transferred to the 2 nd respondent,

who is a close friend of the petitioner's husband as security for

an amount which was borrowed from the 2 nd respondent. It is

further submitted that the specific understanding was that the

property would be reconveyed. According to the petitioner, the

respondents 2 and 3 mortgaged the property with the 1 st

respondent and obtained a loan of Rs.1 crore and the Bank is

proceeding against the property. The prayer in the writ petition

is for a direction to the 1st respondent to grant 6 months to the

petitioner to settle the entire loan amount through the

respondents 2 and 3.

WP(C) NO. 13756 OF 2023

2. Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent

submits that the respondents 2 and 3 had approached this Court

by filing W.P.(C) No.5358 of 2020, which was disposed of on

04.03.2020 directing them to seek their alternate remedy under

Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial

Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The

petitioner cannot claim any right against the Bank, as the Bank

has accepted the security as mortgage and advanced loan to the

respondents 2 and 3. There is no contention that the title deed of

the respondents 2 and 3 is vitiated. All that is stated is that

there was a promise to reconvey. That is essentially a dispute

between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3.

In such circumstances, since there is no privity of contract

with the Bank, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief from

this Court in this writ petition. This writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE mpm WP(C) NO. 13756 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13756/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO1080 DT 14/5/15.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DT NIL IN OSNO962/18 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT KOLLAM.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT DT 4/6/19 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY TALUK LEGAL SERVICE COMMITTEE. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE DT 15/7/20 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT 1/2/23 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.