High Court Kerala High Court

V.Selvaraja vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
V.Selvaraja vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1098 of 2010(J)


1. V.SELVARAJA, CC.18/1647,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE

5. UCO BANK, FORT KOCHI BRANCH,

6. KANAKAMMAL, W/O.SELVARAJ,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.MADHU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :20/01/2010

 O R D E R
                    P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
                  -----------------------------
                        W.P(C) No. 1098 of 2010-J
                 ------------------------------
              Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010.

                          J U D G M E N T

The case projected in the Writ Petition is that the property

owned by the petitioner is not liable to be proceeded against by the

respondents particularly in respect of the dues to be cleared by the

sixth respondent, under some loan transaction with the fifth

respondent bank.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

sixth respondent, though is the wife of the petitioner, had availed a

loan in her own capacity, being the proprietrix of a textile shop; for

which the petitioner had never stood as a guarantor, nor had he

created any equitable mortgage or security over the property,

owned, possessed and enjoyed by him.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank

submits that that the bank has intended to proceed only against the

properties owned, possessed and enjoyed by the sixth respondent

ie. the wife of the petitioner and that the properties of the petitioner

W.P(C) No. 1098 of 2010-J 2

are not intended to be proceeded against. The said submission is

recorded and the Writ Petition is disposed of, making clear that

Exts.P2 and P3 proceedings issued in the name of the sixth

respondent could be proceeded against only in respect of the said

respondent and not against the petitioner or his properties as

referred to in the Writ Petition.

Sd/-

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge

ab