IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 35540 of 2007(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- V.J. THOMAS, S/O.V.M.JOSEPH, CF-7/332, TILAK NAGAR, PAROTTUKONAM, NALANCHIRA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- FEDERAL BANK LTD., REGD. OFFICE, ALUVA BRANCH, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. R1 BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.35540/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN O.A. NO.215/2004 BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN - DEFENDANT IN O.A. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S CASE SHEET IN SREE UTHRADAM THIRUNAL HOSPITAL, TRIVANDRUM. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE ENVELOPE SHOWING THE RELEVANT ENTRY. EXT.P3(a):- COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DT. 5.12.2006 IN OA. 215/2004 OF THE DRT., ERNAKULAM. EXT.P3(b):- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 19.12.2006 ISSUED BY THE RECOVERY OFFICER. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE IA. NO.217/07 IN OA. 215/04 TO SET SIDE THE EXPARTE ORDER. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE IA. NO.218/07 IN OA. 215/2004 TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPLICATION. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY RESPONDENT HEREIN IN IA. 217/07 IN OA. 215/2004. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE OBJECTION IN IA. 218/07 IN OA. 215/04. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DT. 9.10.07 IN IA. NOS. 217/07 & 18/07 IN OA. 215/04. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.35540 of 2007-E = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.Petitioner challenges Ext.P8 order by which the Debts Recovery Tribunal refused to set aside an ex parte recovery order. At the stage of admission of this writ petition on 30-11-2007, it was noticed that if the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of an appeal to the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, including the ground on which the application to set aside the ex parte decree was filed and having regard to the contentions in Ext.P1 written statement, the matter can be considered by this Court. Accordingly, the petitioner was directed to remit an amount of Rs.6 lacs. The petitioner has deposited that amount and a memo has been filed to that effect. WP(C)35540/2007 -: 2 :- 2.Even the materials noticed by the Tribunal in Ext.P8 order would show that the petitioner had been participating in the proceedings before he was set ex parte at final hearing as he was not represented. The amount involved in the litigation and the fact that the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.6 lacs coupled with the medical evidence on record of his treatment in the Sree Uthradom Thirunal Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram, tend to show that this is an abundantly fit case where the petitioner is given an opportunity of being heard and to contest the proceedings before the Tribunal from the stage at which he was set ex parte. In the result, this writ petition is allowed quashing Exts.P3(a) and P8 orders and directing that the Tribunal will take up the case and afford the petitioner an opportunity of being heard in relation to the final recovery order. The amounts deposited will be given due credit while doing so. The petitioner will also pay the bank an amount of Rs.5,000/- as cost and this WP(C)35540/2007 -: 3 :- judgment will be on condition that the said amount is paid to the bank within a period of three weeks from now. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0506