SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 14222

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
RAGHAVAN JAYADEV – Appellant
Versus
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 46407 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.ASMIN NAYARA, SMT.AYSWARYA KRISHHNAN, SHRI.VAISHAKH M.S
For the Respondents: SMT.S.AMBILY, SMT.RUPA R. NAIR, SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.), SMT. AMBILY S

Writ petitions related to SARFAESI matters cannot be entertained due to non-compliance with interim orders.

Headnote:The petition challenges recovery proceedings initiated by the respondent bank under loan defaults. The petitioner was previously directed to remit amounts due but failed to comply. The Court, referencing South Indian Bank Ltd v. Naveen Mathew Philip, found it inappropriate to entertain the writ for SARFAESI matters and noted the petitioner could seek a settlement. The writ petition is disposed of.

Table of Content
1. failure to remit loan payments results in inability to grant relief. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court declines to entertain writs for sarfaesi matters. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been filed challenging the recovery proceedings initiated by the respondent bank to recover amounts due under credit facilities availed by the petitioner from the respondent bank.

2. When this matter was taken up for consideration on

12.12.2025, the petitioner was directed to remit a sum of Rs.10 lakhs within a period of two weeks and the proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P2 was directed to be kept in abeyance. The interim order was extended thereafter.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that the petitioner has availed six loans namely, a car loan, a business loan, a housing loan, a housing top up loan and an insurance loan.

4. When this matter came up for consideration on

06.02.2026, the petitioner undertook that he will remit the entire dues in the car loan as well as the overdue amount in the business loan by 10.02.2026, and the case was posted to 12.02.2026. On 12.02.2026 also, the petitioner did not remit the amount as undertaken before this Court . Therefore, the interim order was not extended and it was made clear that the bank can proceed with in accordance with the law. Since the interim order is not fully complied with, the petitioner cannot be granted the reliefs sought for in this writ petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent, taking note of the fact of non-compliance, availability of efficacious remedy and also taking note of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in South Indian Bank Ltd v. Naveen Mathew Philip [ (2023) 17 SCC 311 ], I am of the opinion that the writ petition cannot be entertained in respect of SARFAESI matters.

Therefore, leaving open the right of the petitioner to approach the bank for One Time Settlement or for granting instalments to clear the entire loan amount, the writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top