Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
IQBAL R.H. – Appellant
Versus
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, TRICHUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to a tribunal's order (Para 1) |
| 2. filing for amendment in proceedings (Para 2) |
| 3. confirmation of tribunal order by appellate court (Para 3) |
| 4. error in denial of amendment application (Para 4) |
| 5. timeliness of amendment application (Para 5) |
| 6. directions for tribunal's further proceedings (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-2. Ernakulam in Securitisation Application No.201 of 2010. Through the said order, the Tribunal dismissed the Securitisation Application along with all the pending interlocutory applications.
2. The petitioner had filed Ext.P4 application seeking an amendment of the S.A., as I.A.No.1657/2012, in S.A.No.210 of 2012, challenging the sale that took place on 17.12.2011. Earlier, pending the Securitisation Application, a sale was attempted, which did not materialise for want of bidders. Later, when a sale was notified, the petitioner filed I.A.No.17 of 2012 seeking a stay of the sale. No stay was granted, and the sale was held, which made the petitioner prefer I.A.No.1657 of 2012 seeking an amendment to incorporate a challenge to the sale held on 17.12.2011, pending the Securitisation Ap
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
