NAIJO K OUSEPH Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are applicants in the Securitisation Application filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Ernakulam. The petitioners seek to set aside Ext.P12 and to direct the 1st respondent to number Ext.P1 SA filed in the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

(2.) The petitioners state that they approached the Tribunal invoking Sec. 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The Tribunal noted defects in the IA. The defect noted was that since the property which is subject matter of Sec. 14 proceedings is situated in Thrissur District, the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I has no jurisdiction to try the SA.

(3.) The petitioners answered the defect on 9/11/2023 stating that the petitioners are challenging Annexure-A2 demand notices, Annexure-A3 to A5 possession notices, Annexue-A10 affidavit and Annexure-A11 order passed under Sec. 14. The petitioners submitted that out of the four properties involved, three properties which are included in the impugned demand notices and possession notices are in Puthenvelikkara Village in Ernakulam District. Therefore, the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I has jurisdiction to try the SA.