IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
SUNIL KUMAR T.P. – Appellant
Versus
CANARA BANK, KOOTHALI BRANCH – Respondent
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 25th day of November, 2025 Ext.P3 notice issued by the Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of petitioner's property in terms of the SARFAESI Act is under challenge in this Writ Petition. As a pre-condition to stay Ext.P3, this Court, by Order dated 27.08.2025, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2 lakhs within a period of one month. No amount, whatsoever, has been paid by the petitioner in compliance of that Order. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, there is no representation for the petitioner.
2. This Court takes stock of the settled legal position that by invoking its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , the High Court cannot interfere in the SARFAESI proceedings legitimately instituted by the Banks for recovery of the amounts due. In the circumstances, the instant Writ Petition (Civil) will stand dismissed, without prejudice to the petitioner's right to avail statutory remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.