Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P., J
C.A. RAJAN S/o. ABRAHAM – Appellant
Versus
SOUTH BANK LIMITED – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This original petition has been filed challenging Ext.P13 order dated 07.02.2025 in S.A.No. 462 of 2023 issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam.
The brief facts:-
2. The petitioners availed credit facilities from the respondent bank. On default being committed, proceedings were initiated against the petitioners under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI Act’). The property of the petitioners which was mortgaged to secure the repayment to the respondent bank was brought to sale. The sale was scheduled to be held on 22.11.2023. The petitioners had filed S.A.No. 462 of 2023 challenging the proceedings of taking physical possession of the secured assets and thereafter, the Securitization Application was amended impugning the sale proposed to be held on 22.11.2023. Ext.P7 interim order was issued by the Tribunal on 22.11.2023 and that order to the extent relevant reads thus;
“2. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that sale is scheduled to be held on today. If the stay is not granted the applicants would face hardship. Hence s
The Tribunal must consider merits and apply due diligence in SARFAESI Act proceedings, treating them like civil suits, to ensure fair adjudication.
The DRAT has the power to remand a SARFAESI application to the DRT for fresh adjudication, where the DRT has not considered various disputed issues raised by the parties, including service of notice,....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Rule 9(4) and 9(5) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, highlighting the requirement for the purchaser to pay ....
Auction sale under SARFAESI Act upheld; simultaneous civil proceedings do not invalidate the completed transaction, and allegations of undervaluation found unsubstantiated.
While expressing the aforesaid view, we are conscious that the powers conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate....
Though existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, but a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional....
though existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, but a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
