Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K. Vinod Chandran, J
M/s. M.D. Esthappan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Dhanlaxmi Bank Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claims for msme benefits must be raised before loan accounts are classified as npas. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the petitioners' delay in raising their msme status disqualified them from relief. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. the bank's compliance with statutory requirements is scrutinized under binding precedents. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. judicial discretion in writ jurisdiction concerns the conduct of parties in legal processes. (Para 10) |
1. These writ petitions are filed raising identical contentions and can, therefore, be disposed of by common judgment. The 1st petitioner in W.P.(C)No.46514/2024 is a Private Limited Company and the 2nd petitioner in that writ petition is stated to be the Managing Director of the 1st petitioner Company. In the connected writ petition, namely, W.P.(C)No.45166/2024, the 1st petitioner is described as 'M/s. M.D. Esthappan' (a proprietary concern) and the 2nd petitioner (who is also the 2nd petitioner in W.P.(C)No.46514/2024) is stated to be the sole proprietor of the 1st petitioner. The petitioners in these cases have availed credit facilities from the Dhanlaxmi Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank'). On default being committed, proceedings have bee
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
