Indira A vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises
2024 Latest Caselaw 11049 Ker

Kerala High Court

Indira A vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises on 12 April, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946
                       WP(C) NO. 15331 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          INDIRA A.,
          AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. AJITH,
          KANJIRAKKAT,
          THIRUNALLOOR P.O., CHERTHALA,
          ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 541.

          BY ADV PAUL JOHN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES,
          BHADRATHA, MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR, PIN-680 020
          REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

    2     THE MANAGER,
          PATTANAKKADU BRANCH,
          KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES,
          PATTANAKKADU, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 531.

    3     THE MANAGER,
          CHERTHALA BRANCH,
          KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES,
          CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 524.

          SRI.SALIL NARAYANAN K.A., STANDING COUNSEL

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.15331 of 2024

                                         -:2:-


                                     JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2024

Amidst the various allegations, averments and assertions

made and urged in this writ petition, what really the petitioner

requires is a direction to the Kerala State Financial

Enterprises ("KSFE") to revalue his property, which had been

mortgaged by her as collateral security for a loan availed

earlier.

2. Sri.Salil Narayanan - learned Standing Counsel for

the "KSFE", very fairly submitted that, even though the

petitioner's property has been valued at least twice before, if

he requires it to be done again and is willing to accept the

expenses for the same to be debited to his account, his client

will have no objection in doing so.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner -

Sri.Paul John, acceded to the afore suggestion.

4. In the afore circumstances, I allow this Writ Petition

and direct the Competent Authority of the respondent -

"KSFE" to once again conduct the valuation of the petitioner's

property, in his presence if he is interested; thus culminating

in an appropriate valuation report - a copy of which will be

given to her, without any avoidable delay.

5. Needless to say, all further recovery action

pursuant to Ext.P6 - which is stated to be only a notice issued

by the Branch - will stand deferred until the afore is done and

the valuation report communicated to the petitioner.

It is further clarified that I have not entered into the

merits of any of the other contentions and that all of them are

left open.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

bpr

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15331/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF VALUATION REPORT DATED 13-06-2023.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF VALUATION REPORT DATED 2019.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF VALUATION REPORT DATED 12-07-2023.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER GIVEN BY PETITIONER.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF VALUATION REPORT DATED 07.09.2023 BY PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 07.03.2024 FROM 3ED RESPONDENT.