Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.V.ELIZABETH, W/O.DEVASSY versus HDFC BANK

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.V.ELIZABETH, W/O.DEVASSY v. HDFC BANK - WP(C) No. 2234 of 2007(N) [2007] RD-KL 4583 (1 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 2234 of 2007(N)

1. V.V.ELIZABETH, W/O.DEVASSY,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. HDFC BANK,
... Respondent

2. SAJU EAPEN,

3. SILFY SAJU EAPEN,

4. NAVEEN, AGED 33 YEARS,

For Petitioner :SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR

For Respondent :SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

Dated :01/03/2007

O R D E R

THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J

W.P(C).No.2234 OF 2007

Dated this the 1st day of March, 2007



JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been admitted on 19.1.2007 and an interim order was granted to stay the impugned proceedings against them for three weeks on the petitioner remitting Rupees One Lakh. Such remittance is made on 1.2.2007.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned for the first respondent on the basis of instructions as well the counter affidavit, which is stated to have been filed.

3. Respondents 2 and 3 availed a housing loan from the first respondent. They instituted power of attorney in favour of the petitioner to transfer the property in question to the 4th respondent, who is none other than the son of the petitioner. There appears to be an agreement of sale between respondents 2 and 3, the original owners, and the 4th respondent with the junction of the petitioner as the power of attorney holder of WPC.2234/07 Page numbers respondents 2 and 3, and respondents 2 and 3 are now stated to be not traced.

4. The first respondent has made publication of notice of the securitisation proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the notice issued to respondents 2 and 3 has returned. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is directed that if the petitioner pays the entire amounts due to the first respondent on or before 28.3.2007, further proceedings shall be dropped and the title deeds in relation to the property shall be released by the first respondent to the petitioner on the petitioner filing a further undertaking to indemnify the first respondent in case of any claim by respondents 2 and 3. It is further directed that the petitioner or the 4th respondent shall not alienate the property for a further period of seven years. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN Judge kkb.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.