High Court Kerala High Court

State Bank Of Travancore Rep. By … vs S.B.T on 7 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
State Bank Of Travancore Rep. By … vs S.B.T on 7 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 23635 of 2008(L)


1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE REP. BY ITS
                      ...  Petitioner
2. AUTHORISED OFFICER STATE BANK OF

                        Vs


1. S.B.T.
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :07/08/2008

 O R D E R
                     ANTONY DOMINIC, J

    -----------------------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.23635/2008
    -----------------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 7th     day of August, 2008


                           JUDGMENT

Proceedings under the Securitisation and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Security Interests

Act was initiated against the petitioner. Ext.P1 is the notice

issued under Section 13(2) of the Act. It would appear that

subsequently a compromise was discussed between the

parties and the proposal was accepted by the Empowered

Committee of the Bank. Thereafter, by Ext.P2 dated

16.7.2008 the compromise was approved subject to

remittance of Rs.8.75 lakhs on or before 30.8.2008.

2. It is stated that in the meanwhile, by Ext.P3 notice

issued on 8.7.2008, petitioner has been informed that an

application has been made by the Bank for an order under

Section 14 of the Act and that the case is posted to

WP(c).No.23635/2008 2

17.7.2008. It is contending that the petitioner has time till

30.8.2008 to make payment of the compromise amount and

apprehending that in the meanwhile, he may be evicted on

the strength of an order under Section 14 that this writ

petition has been filed.

3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner also.

4. Evidently, in terms of the compromise petitioner

has time till 30.8.2008 and this is clear from Ext.P2. If that

be so, even if in the meanwhile, an order under Section 14

has been obtained by the Bank, petitioner is not liable to be

dispossessed before 30.8.2008.

With the above observation, the writ petition is closed.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE

vi.

WP(c).No.23635/2008 3