Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
FARSEEN AHAMED U – Appellant
Versus
IDBI BANK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges wrongful bank actions based on unauthorized arbitration orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsels present their arguments before the court. (Para 3) |
| 3. court observes banks cannot act on informal arbitration communications. (Para 4) |
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2025 The petitioner, a citizen of India and account holder with IDBI Bank, discovered on 22.05.2025 that ₹ 6,945.29 had been debited from his account and a lien of ₹ 6,59,059.61 was marked without any prior notice or legal authority. This action was based solely on an e-mail allegedly received from SAMA, a private online dispute resolution platform, claiming to enforce an interim order under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996.
2. The petitioner states that he was neither served notice of any arbitration proceedings nor made a party to such proceedings. The IDBI Bank, acting without any court sanction or due process, has violated the petitioner’s rights under Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution. The petitioner seeks a writ to reverse the wrongful debit, lift the lien, restrain further unlawful action, and declare the bank’s conduct as illegal and ar
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
