Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
RANGANATHAN V S – Appellant
Versus
DHANALAKSHMI BANK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner challenges the bank's right to sell pledged gold. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding the maintainability and terms of the bank's loan. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. consideration of contractual obligations and maintainability of the petition. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court concludes dismissal without reliefs; options for further actions. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging Exts.P5 to P8 notices issued by the respondent Bank proposing to sell gold ornaments which were pledged by the petitioner, his wife, and his daughter.
2. The respondent Bank has filed a statement opposing the prayers in the Writ Petition.
3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Thomas Abraham, and the learned counsel for the respondent – Bank, Sri. C.K. Karunakaran.
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the period for which the gold was pledged has not expired, and before that, the bank has no right to sell the gold ornaments pledged with the bank. The liability under the gold loan is around Rs.1 Crore, whereas the gold pledged is having a value of more than Rs.3 Crores. The petitioner and his wife are in jail. The petitioner
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
