Kerala High Court
Sameera vs South Indian Bank on 4 July, 2024
Author: N. Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1946
OP (DRT) NO. 180 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.05.2024 IN I.A No.1594 OF
2024 IN SA NO.201 OF 2024 OF THE DEBTS RECOVERY
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/APPLICANT IN SA 201/2024:
SAMEERA
AGED 40 YEARS, W/O BEERAN ALI
KALLUNGAL HOUSE ,MANNIL THODU CHEMMAD,
TIRURANGADI MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676 306.
BY ADVS.
M.R.REENA
P.S.SUJETH
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT IN SA 201/2024:
SOUTH INDIAN BANK
CHEMMAD -THIRURANGADI BRANCH
REP BY ITS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER ,
REGIONAL OFFICE KOZHIKODE 1ST FLOOR ,
HAPPY TOWERS V.M.B.ROAD ,
MANAMCHIRA KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001.
BY ADVS.
P.PAULOCHAN ANTONY P
SREEJITH K.(K/380/2005)
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 04.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(DRT) No.180/2024
:2:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
O.P.(DRT) No.180 of 2024
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2024
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
The OP(DRT) has been filed by the petitioner
aggrieved by the order dated 06.05.2024 in IA No.1594/2024
in SA No.201/2024 on the files of the Debts Recovery
Tribunal-I, Ernakulam.
2. The petitioner states that she availed two Term
Loans in the years 2018 and 2019 respectively for a term of
12 years. The loan of ₹34 lakhs was availed for the
construction of her residential house. The title deed of 4
Cents of property along with residential building was
mortgaged as security.
3. The petitioner was served with possession notice
dated 08.01.2024 under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner hence filed SA
No.201/2024, which is still pending. Pending the SA, when
the authorised officer initiated Section 14 proceedings and
when the Advocate Commissioner issued notice dated
21.03.2024, the petitioner filed IA No.1594/2024 challenging
the order dated 06.05.2024.
4. The petitioner states that the Tribunal passed
Ext.P1 order on 06.05.2024 granting a stay till 20.06.2024
subject to the petitioner paying ₹4,50,000/- on or before
20.05.2024 as first instalment and another sum of
₹4,50,000/- on or before 19.06.2024.
5. The petitioner has filed this OP(DRT) aggrieved by
Ext.P1 order dated 06.05.2024 alleging that the petitioner
has been ordered to remit a huge amount within a short
period. The petitioner urged that the Tribunal ought to have
given a reasonable time for making payment and only
reasonable amounts ought to have been ordered to be paid.
The petitioner therefore seeks to set aside the order dated
06.05.2024 of the Tribunal in IA No.1594/2024.
6. Standing Counsel entered appearance and
resisted the OP(DRT) on behalf of the respondent-Bank.
The Standing Counsel submitted that when this OP(DRT)
came up for admission on 17.05.2024, this Court passed an
interim order permitting the petitioner to pay the first
instalment of ₹4,50,000/- on or before 30.05.2024 as a last
chance. The petitioner has not paid the amount as directed
by this Court though a smaller amount of ₹1.5 lakh has been
paid by the petitioner.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Standing Counsel representing the
respondent-Bank.
8. Ext.P1 is the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal
under challenge in this OP(DRT), filed invoking Article 227
of the Constitution of India. IA No.1594/2024 from which
Ext.P1 order arises was filed by the petitioner praying to stay
all further proceedings in pursuance of the issuance of
Advocate Commissioner's notice and order of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate's Court, Manjeri.
9. The Tribunal considered the contentions of the
petitioner and granted a conditional interim stay with respect
to the secured asset subject to payment of ₹4,50,000/- on or
before 20.05.2024 directly to the respondent-Bank as first
instalment and another sum of ₹4,50,000/- directly to the
respondent-Bank on or before 19.06.2024 as second
instalment. The Tribunal further ordered that in the event of
failure to pay any one of the instalments, the Bank will be at
liberty to proceed further, without making any reference to
the Tribunal.
10. When this OP(DRT) was filed challenging the said
interim order, this Court passed interim order dated
17.05.2024 permitting the petitioner to pay the first instalment
as ordered as per Ext.P1 on or before 30.05.2024 as last
chance. The Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner
has paid only ₹1.5 lakh pursuant to the interim order.
11. The Tribunal has exercised its discretion while
granting Ext.P1 interim order in IA No.1594/2024. When the
said order was challenged, this Court also passed an interim
order on 17.05.2024 extending the time to pay the first
instalment. The petitioner has failed to adhere to the time
schedule. I do not find any illegality or irregularity or
perversity in Ext.P1 order passed by the Debts Recovery
Tribunal-I, Ernakulam warranting interference under Article
227 of the Constitution of India.
The OP(DRT) therefore fails and it is dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/02.07.2024
APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 180/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA
NO.1594/2024 IN SA NO 201/2024 DATED
06-05-2024 OF THE HON'BLE DRT-1
ERNAKULAM.
