IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 36242 of 2010(E)
1. GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ANDHRA BANK LTD., M.G.ROAD,
... Respondent
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
3. TAHSILDAR, NEYYATTINKARA,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :08/12/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 36242 OF 2010
=====================
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010
J U D G M E N T
According to the petitioner, he purchased 34 cents of land
from one Smt.Nandhini. It is stated that long after the sale,
respondent Bank has now issued proceedings against the
property by issuing Ext.P7. It is in these circumstances, the writ
petition has been filed contending that the proceedings initiated
by the Bank against the property in question is illegal and
therefore should be quashed.
2. From the submissions that are made by the standing
counsel appearing for the Bank, what has emerged is that, long
before the property was sold in favour of the petitioner, the
previous owner had mortgaged the property to the Bank along
with other items of property. It is stated that default was
committed and that therefore the Bank initiated proceedings
under the Securitisation Act. It is submitted that it was in the
course of the aforesaid proceedings that the Bank has issued
Ext.P7.
3. Admittedly, the property is one which is mortgaged to
WPC No. 36242/10
:2 :
the respondent Bank and default has been committed by the
vendor of the petitioner. In such circumstances, if the Bank has
taken recourse to the proceedings under the Securitisation Act,
which is perfectly permissible and this court cannot find fault with
the Bank. Therefore, no relief as sought for by the petitioner can
be granted.
4. Be that as it may, I leave it open to the petitioner to
pursue with the bank for settling the dispute, in which event, it is
upto the Bank to consider the request and pass orders thereon.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp