THANKACHAN JOSE Vs. FEDERAL BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam to dispose of I.A.Nos.1479 and 1480 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible and also challenges Ext.P7 notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner in Crl.M.P.No.2711 of 2016 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam.

(2.) The facts involved in the writ petition would disclose that the petitioner had taken three loans; housing loan by mortgaging the residential property covered by Ext.P7 notice, another overdraft cash credit facility and term loan. According to the petitioner, not much amount was payable as far as the housing loan is concerned and therefore, there was no necessity for the Bank to take possession of the premises, having an extent of 10 cents which is mortgaged only for the W.P.(C) No. 30308 of 2016 purpose of housing loan. Further, it is submitted that as far as other 50 cents of property is concerned, it is an agricultural property and therefore, the petitioner has taken up such contentions before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. However, no action had been taken for the disposal of the said applications and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank would however submit that all the loans had been treated as Non Performance Asset, since the accounts relating to the cash credit as well as the term loan had been defaulted. As far as the housing loan is concerned, by virtue of the interim direction issued by this Court, the petitioner had remitted the overdue amount and what remains is only Rs.10,750/-. It is also submitted that when default is committed, it shall be open for the Bank to treat all the accounts as NPA.