Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
MR. SONY GEORGE – Appellant
Versus
THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and mortgage agreement details (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. legal arguments and claims by petitioners (Para 9 , 12) |
| 3. judicial discretion and available remedies (Para 11 , 13) |
| 4. court's justification for non-intervention (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
(Dated this the 6th day of February, 2026)
Petitioners are not parties to the loan transaction. They filed S.A.No.783 of 2025 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam, aggrieved by the recovery measures initiated against their ancestral property. Immovable property having an extent of 40 cents comprised in Sy. no.124/1 in Chittilappilly Village, Thrissur District, originally belonged to late Mary George. After the death of the father, the A schedule of property was allotted to Mejo George/3rd respondent and their mother, Mary George, under partition No.3571/2010 of the Mundur SRO. The 3rd respondent demolished the existing structure, built a new house, and continued to reside there. The 3rd respondent and Mary George agreed to sell the property to the petitioners for a consideration of Rs.4,00,00,000/-, and a written agreement was executed on 02.11.2017. The petitioners paid the 3rd respondent a total of
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
