IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MR. MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
M/S. G.K. GRANITES REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, GEORGE ANTONY – 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
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. L.K. Ratna
Thomas P.T. and another v. Bijo Thomas and others
South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Naveen Mathew Philip
Federal Bank Ltd. v. Sagar Thomas
United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon
State Bank of Travancore v. Mathew K.C.
Prestige Lights Limited v. State Bank of India
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.