Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
M.D. Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Reserve Bank Of India Represented By Its Governor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by the review petitioners. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's reasoning and observations. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. final dismissal of review petitions. (Para 19) |
ORDER :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The appellants in W.A.Nos.481 of 2025 and 484 of 2025 have filed these review petitions, invoking the provisions under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking review of the judgment of this Court dated 24.06.2025 in W.A.Nos.481 of 2025 and 484 of 2025.
2. The 1st appellant in W.A.No.481 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C)No.45166 of 2024, is M/s.M.D. Esthappan, a sole proprietorship concern, and the 2nd appellant M.D. Esthappan is the sole proprietor of the said concern. The 1st appellant in W.A.No.484 of 2025, arising out of W.P.(C)No.46514 of 2024, is M/s.M.D. Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and the 2nd appellant M.D. Esthappan is the Managing Director of the said company. The writ petitions were filed challenging the proceedings initiated by the 3rd respondent Dhanlaxmi Bank Ltd.
Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the CPC is limited to correcting patent errors; it does not allow for rehearing of matters on merits.
The classification of accounts as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) under the SARFAESI Act is valid if MSMEs do not timely assert their status, failing to invoke protections under the MSMED Act's revival f....
A registered MSME must disclose its status before NPA classification to invoke protections under relevant frameworks; failure to do so precludes later challenges to recovery actions.
The court upheld that simultaneous proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act are permissible, and reiterated principles of res judicata and the responsibilities ....
Borrowers classified as MSMEs must assert their status before NPA classification to invoke benefits under the SARFAESI Act; failure to do so precludes subsequent claims.
The High Court should not exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 in matters governed by the SARFAESI Act where effective remedies exist, and classification of accounts as NPAs is not subject to judi....
Borrowers classified as MSMEs must assert their status before NPA classification to invoke benefits under the SARFAESI Act; failure to do so precludes subsequent claims.
MSMEs must raise their status before loan accounts are classified as NPAs; failure to do so precludes later claims for benefits under the SARFAESI Act.
Failure to assert MSME status prior to NPA classification precludes later claims for protection under the MSMED Act in SARFAESI proceedings.
MSMEs must timely assert their status to benefit from statutory protections under the SARFAESI Act; failure to do so precludes them from raising claims at a later stage.
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
