Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Union Bank of India, Kottayam – Appellant
Versus
Grids Engineers and Contractors – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interim orders must be justified with reasoning. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. high court recognizes jurisdictional limits under sarfaesi act. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 3. remedies provided in sarfaesi act should be exhausted. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judicial discretion requires adherence to legal protocols. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. writ appeal allowed, prior orders set aside. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The respondents in W.P.(C)No.26067 of 2025 filed this writ appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, being aggrieved by the interim order dated 18.08.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.
3. On 18.07.2025, when the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Single Judge passed an interim order, which reads thus:
4. Challenging the above interim order, the appellants approached this Court by filing Writ Appeal No.1802 of 2025. By the judgment dated 11.08.2025, this Court disposed of that writ appeal setting aside the interim order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, on the sole ground that it is not supported by reasons. Paragraphs 8, 9 and the last paragraph of that judgment read thus:
In the result, this writ appeal is disposed of, by
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.
When alternative statutory remedies are available, a writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable, particularly in financial recovery matters under the SARFAESI Act, unless exceptional circums....
The High Court emphasized the necessity for statutory remedies under the SARFAESI Act rather than invoking Article 226, affirming that approaches must follow prescribed legal frameworks in financial ....
Writ jurisdiction must align with statutory procedures; courts should exercise restraint in commercial matters, particularly regarding SARFAESI Act enforcement.
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 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 court emphasized the necessity of exhausting statutory remedies before invoking constitutional provisions, reaffirming that interim orders affecting financial institutions must stem from substant....
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....
High Courts should not interfere under Article 226 in matters involving the SARFAESI Act when alternative statutory remedies are available, emphasizing judicial restraint.
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
