Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALEE KRISHNA S., ANIL K.NARENDRAN
G.K. Granites – Appellant
Versus
Board of Directors of South Indian Bank Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.
1. The appellant, a Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise (MSME) issued with Ext.P1 Udyam Certificate dated 24.03.2021 by the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, Government of India, filed W.P.(C)No.46770 of 2025, invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
“a) To declare that the notification dated 29.05.2015, in unmistakable terms, declares that the MSME-borrower has no obligation to make an application for resolution of stress and, on the contrary, that banks and financial institutions are duty-bound to identify incipient stress based on the illustrative signs indicated in Annexure-I to the RBI Circular dated 17.03.2016; and further, that in any case where the bank has failed to identify incipient stress, it is duty-bound to classify the account as SMA-1 if the default is more than 31 days and as SMA-2 if the default is more than 61 days, and thereafter shall constitute a Committee and make a reference to that Committee for resolution of stress; and further, that the Committee is empowered to permit recovery in terms of Para 5(3)(iv) if the resolution of stress
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....
Courts should respect statutory routes for recovery before entertaining writ petitions in commercial matters, emphasizing the efficacy of specialized tribunals under SARFAESI.
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 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 ....
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....
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 writ petition under Article 226 cannot be entertained if effective statutory remedies exist, requiring proper reasoning in interim orders issued by the court.
(1) Writ petitions filed against proposed action under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act is not maintainable and/or entertainable at all.(2) Recovery of debt – High Court should have been extremely caref....
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
