High Court of KeralaWP(C)/38228/2015disposed of

N.Krishnankutty v. M/S.Indusind Bank Ltd

2015-12-16Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 38228 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

--------------------------

1. N. KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, 55 YEARS OF AGE, 'THOTTATHIL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU', VENMANNOOR, ANAKKOTTOOR P.O., KOLLAM - 691 505.

2. VIJAYAKUMARI, W/O. N. KRISHNANKUTTY, 43 YEARS OF AGE, 'THOTTATHIL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU', VENMANNOOR, ANAKKOTTOOR P.O., KOLLAM - 691 505. BY ADVS.SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SRI.H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA), SRI.ASHARAF PUTHIYOTTIL.

RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. M/S. INDUSIND BANK LTD., VARINJAM TOWERS, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM -691 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER.

2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, M/S. INDUSIND BANK LTD., VARINJAM TOWERS, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM-691 003.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 38228 of 2015 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE WAKF TRIBUNAL IN OP(ARB) NO.519/2015 DATED 28.10.2015.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.38228 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of December 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the District court in OP(Arb) No.519/2015, whereby he has been asked to pay an amount of Rs.35,749/-, pursuant to an order of attachment before judgment that is passed under order 38 rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the writ petition, the prayer of the petitioner is for the grant of instalments to discharge the liability in Ext.P1 notice issued to him.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the nature of the order that I propose to pass, I do not deem it necessary to hear the respondents.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I find that against the order passed under order 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner has a remedy by way of an appeal before this Court, in terms of Section 37 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act r/w order 43 rule 1(q) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The remedy of the

W.P.(c).No.38228 of 2015 : 2 :

petitioner lies in pursuing the appeal against Ext.P1 order before this Court. To enable the petitioner to pursue his appellate remedy against Ext.P1, I direct that attachment proceedings pursuant Ext.P1 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one week from today. The writ petition is disposed as above.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE sm/