Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18790
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J
KUDUMBASREE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY – Appellant
Versus
THE DHANALAXMI BANK – Respondent
OP (DRT) NO. 118 OF 2026 | TA NO.1105 OF 2016 | O.A No.10 of 2012
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.V.K.PRASAD, SMT.JOSNA.C.F, SHRI.AKHIL R. MENON, SMT.ALVEENA K. A.
For the Respondents: None listed
Judicial review is not warranted when alternative statutory remedies exist.
Headnote:The petition seeks to set aside orders Ext.P11 and P12 from the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II impacting liability on the petitioner. The court confirms that alternative remedies exist under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and declines jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The court dismisses the petition allowing the petitioner to pursue appellate rights.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment lifecycle and judicial discretion. (Para 1 , 2) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2026 The prayer sought for in this original petition is to set aside Ext.P11 and P12 orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam insofar as, they fasten the liability upon the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on admission.
3. It is to be seen that Ext.P11 is an order dated
31.10.2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam in T.A.No.1105/2016 (O.A No.10 of 2012) on merits. Similarly, Ext.P12 would show that it is a recovery certificate issued under Section 19 (22) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 , consequent to Ext.P11 order. The petitioner is having an efficacious alternative remedy to challenge the former order under Section 20 and the latter order under Section 30 of the .
In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in this case.
Ergo, this original petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions and right of the petitioner to approach the appellate authorities.
Sd/-
