The State Bank Of India vs M/S. Great India Estate Pvt. Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 11983 Ker

Kerala High Court

The State Bank Of India vs M/S. Great India Estate Pvt. Ltd on 7 May, 2024

Author: P Gopinath

Bench: P Gopinath

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
                                 &
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
    TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1946
                        WA NO. 657 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.16916 OF 2024 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS:

    1     THE STATE BANK OF INDIA
          KOWDIAR BRANCH, KOWDIAR (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
          REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER., PIN -
          695003

    2     THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA
          KOWDIAR BRANCH, KOWDIAR (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.,
          PIN - 695003

    3     ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA
          STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, LMS COMPOUND,
          OPPOSITE MUSEUM WEST GATE, VIKAS BHAVAN (P.O),
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695033

          BY ADV JAWAHAR JOSE



RESPONDENT:

          M/S. GREAT INDIA ESTATE PVT. LTD
          GROUND FLOOR, NEW CORPORATION BUILDING, PALAYALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
          DIRECTOR, MR. IQUBAL, S/O. LATE J.M. ELLIAS, AGED
          72 YEARS, MULLASSERY HOUSE, SHASTHAVATTOM, VEILOR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695305

          By DV. RAVI KRISHNAN


THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.05.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A.No.657/2024                           2




                              JUDGMENT

Gopinath, J.

This writ appeal has been filed challenging an order dated

3.5.2024 directing the authorised representatives of the parties to

appear before the Mediation Centre attached to this Court on 9.5.2024

at 10 a.m. to explore the possibility of settlement.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would

submit that the question of settlement can be considered only by a

committee known as the Stressed Assets Resolution Committee and no

individual officer can take a decision regarding settlement. It is

submitted that, in such circumstances, the interim order of the learned

Single Judge is not sustainable in law.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would

submit that the learned Single Judge has only directed an attempt to be

made to settle the matter through mediation and therefore, no

interference is called for with the interim order of the learned Single

Judge.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would then

submit that the appellants may be permitted to be represented by a local

officer stationed at Ernakulam. The learned counsel for the respondent

has no objection in the same, though he points out that the loan account

in question was handled by the Kowdiar Branch of the State Bank of

India.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, we are

not inclined to interfere with the order dated 3.5.2024 in

W.P.(C)No.16916/2024. However, we clarify that the appellants can be

represented at the Mediation by a suitable officer stationed at

Ernakulam.

With this clarification, the writ appeal is closed.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P. JUDGE

sd/-

SYAM KUMAR V.M. JUDGE acd