Kerala High Court
N B Renjith vs Authorized Officer Hdfc Bank Ltd on 6 June, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
OP (DRT) NO. 109 OF 2024
SA NO.317/2023 OF DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS:
1 N B RENJITH
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.BHASKARAN, APARTMENT NO.5C, 5TH FLOOR,
ALUKKAS CASTLE, NEAR CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
2 UMADEVI A G
AGED 52 YEARS
W/O RENJITH N.B, APARTMENT NO.5C, 5TH FLOOR,
ALUKKAS CASTLE, NEAR CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
BY ADVS.
N.SASI
RASMI NAIR T.
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDENTS:
1 AUTHORIZED OFFICER HDFC BANK LTD
HDFC HOUSE, POST BAG NO.1667,
RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, M.G.ROAD,
KOCHI, PIN - 682015
2 DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, ERNAKULAM,
5TH FLOOR, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
PANAMPALLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN - 682036
BY ADVS.
AMBILY S
RUPA R. NAIR(K/001021/2023)
RUBAN JOE TONIYO(K/002926/2022)
MATHEW JOSEPH BALUMMEL(K/001219/2019)
K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.)(C-41)
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(DRT) No.109/2024
:2:
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
OP(DRT) No.109 of 2024
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
The petitioners in OP(DRT) are aggrieved by
Ext.P5 order dated 13.02.2024 in IA No.2091/2023 in SA
No.317/2023 pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II,
Ernakulam.
2. The petitioners had availed two home loans from
the 1st respondent-Bank for ₹4,39,584/- and for ₹49,50,000/-,
in the year 2019. The petitioners had mortgaged 29.34 Ares
of property in Ayyanthole Village, Thrissur District and an
Apartment unit situated in Thrissur.
3. The petitioners state that they had promptly
remitted the loan interest without any default. The petitioners
could not pay the principal amount for some time. The 1 st
respondent, who is Authorised Officer of the Bank, filed an
application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court,
Thrissur invoking Section 14 of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002 and took possession of the
secured asset.
4. The petitioners state that the Tribunal had passed
Ext.P4 proceedings dated 19.09.2023 granting the
petitioners a conditional interim order. However,
subsequently, by Ext.P5 proceedings dated 13.02.2024, the
interim order dated 19.09.2023 was vacated. The petitioners
would urge that there are procedural irregularities in issuing
notices under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002. It is finding prima facie justification in the contentions
raised by the petitioners regarding procedural irregularities
that Ext.P4 interim order was passed. The Tribunal
committed a material error in vacating the interim order on
the failure of the petitioners to make deposits as required in
Ext.P4 proceedings.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing
the 1st respondent.
6. The contention of the petitioners is that the
Tribunal had granted an interim order in their favour as per
Ext.P4 finding prima facie case in the SA relating to
irregularities in the SARFAESI proceedings initiated by the
Bank. Going through Ext.P4 proceedings, I find that Ext.P4
order was passed without going into the merits of the case.
In Ext.P4 proceedings, the DRT had given opportunity to the
petitioners to clear the overdue amount of ₹10 lakhs by
making remittance in instalments. The Tribunal in Ext.P4
had made it clear that in case the petitioners fail to comply
with the conditions in the order, they cannot claim any
equitable relief or protection against the securitisation
measures in respect of the subject matter of property by the
defendant Bank.
In the afore circumstances, I find no reason to
interfere with the order dated 13.02.2024 in IA No.2091/2023
in SA No.317/2023 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The
OP(DRT) is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/05.06.2024
APPENDIX OF OP (DRT) 109/2024
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SA NO.317/2023 WITHOUT
ANNEXURES FILED BEFORE THE DEBT
RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF IA NO.2091/2023 DATED
23.06.2023 FILED BEFORE THE DEBT
RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER DATED
19.07.2023 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
19.9.2023 IN SA 317/2023 BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
13.02.2024 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN SA
