Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MR. MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
DELANTHABETTU KANYANA SHAUL HAMEED – Appellant
Versus
K. MOHAMMED IQBAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties involved and case context (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. interim order details and implications (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's decision on maintainability of appeals (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal principles regarding jurisdiction invoked (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 5. historical judgments referenced (Para 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. jurisdictional issues addressed (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. court's view on reliefs sought (Para 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 8. final remarks on the case outcome (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
[WA Nos.3045/2025 & 3046/2025]
Muralee Krishna S., J.
The appellants, who are third parties and are sought to be impleaded as respondents 2 to 4 in OP(DRT)No.350 of 2025 and as respondents 1 to 3 in OP(DRT)No.348 of 2025 filed W.A.No.3045 of 2025 and W.A.No.3046 of 2025, respectively, under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 , challenging the common interim order dated 18.11.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in those original petitions. Since the point to be considered in these writ appeals is the same, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The petitioners in OP(DRT)No.350 of 2025 are the applicants in S.A.No.182 of 2025 pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal
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
