Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5752

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
THAJUNIZA – Appellant
Versus
KARAMANA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD. – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 8874 OF 2020

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JIBU P THOMAS, SRI.T.SHIHABUDEEN
For the Respondents: None mentioned

The court may provide liberty to reopen a writ petition if the cause for action continues after its closure.

Headnote:In this case involving WP

(C) No. 8874 of 2020, the petitioner sought to quash a notice regarding possession of a secured asset issued on 10.03.2020. The court noted the petition's five-year pendency without orders and decided to close it, allowing for reopening if necessary. The court's liberty provisions underlined the discretion to revisit the matter should the situation change, resulting in a dismissal yet providing potential future recourse.

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 28^th day of January, 2026)

The prayer in this writ petition is to quash Ext.P1 notice issued by the Commissioner to take physical possession of the secured asset. The said notice was issued on 10.03.2020, and no interim order was granted against dispossession. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to get instructions.

In view of the fact that the writ petition has been pending here for the last five years without any orders, I close this writ petition with liberty to reopen if the cause survives.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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 :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5752

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMBASANT BALAJI, JTHAJUNIZA – AppellantVersusKARAMANA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD. – RespondentWP(C) NO. 8874 OF 2020

The court may provide liberty to reopen a writ petition if the cause for action continues after its closure.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
THAJUNIZA – Appellant
Versus
KARAMANA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD. – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 8874 OF 2020