Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
Rosamma Tony, W/o. Tony – Appellant
Versus
South Indian Bank Ltd., Represented By Its Authorized Officer And Chief Manager – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ appeal involves challenge to earlier judgment. (Para 2) |
| 2. court emphasizes disclosure of material facts. (Para 4 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. petitioner claims boundary dispute affecting civil rights. (Para 5 , 6 , 12) |
| 4. high court's power limited to supervisory jurisdiction. (Para 20 , 22 , 25) |
| 5. appeal dismissed; no interference without substantial basis. (Para 21 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
The appellant-petitioner has filed this writ appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958, challenging the judgment dated 19.06.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.20781 of 2025, which was one filed invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , seeking a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent South Indian Bank Ltd., represented by its Authorised Officer and Chief Manager, not to take any steps for possession or boundary demarcation with respect to plaint A schedule property in O.S.No.180 of 2023 on the file of the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda till the said suit is disposed of by that court. In the writ petition, on behalf of the respondent Bank, a coun
In matters involving the SARFAESI Act, the High Court should not intervene through writ petitions where appropriate statutory remedies exist, and full material disclosure is essential to maintaining ....
The High Court must not entertain writ petitions regarding SARFAESI actions without the petitioner first pursuing statutory remedies before the Debts Recovery Tribunal as mandated under the SARFAESI ....
The High Court affirmed that the adequate remedy under the SARFAESI Act must be pursued before seeking judicial intervention, emphasizing the importance of exhausting statutory options.
The High Court ruled that parties must reveal all material facts in writ petitions and that statutory remedies available under the SARFAESI Act must be pursued before invoking writ jurisdiction.
The main legal point established in this judgment is that the High Court should not entertain writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in matters involving recovery of dues under....
A writ petition under Article 226 cannot be entertained if effective statutory remedies exist, requiring proper reasoning in interim orders issued by the court.
Courts should respect statutory routes for recovery before entertaining writ petitions in commercial matters, emphasizing the efficacy of specialized tribunals under SARFAESI.
Financial institutions must follow statutory procedures when dealing with MSME classification and recovery; non-compliance can render actions invalid, emphasizing the need for judicial adherence to e....
Financial institutions must follow statutory procedures when dealing with MSME classification and recovery; non-compliance can render actions invalid, emphasizing the need for judicial adherence to e....
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
