Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J
AJIMON S. – Appellant
Versus
UNION BANK OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 37574 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim regarding coercive actions under relevant act. (Para 1) |
| 2. lack of representation and compliance leads to dismissal. (Para 2) |
| 3. final determination of case dismissal. (Para 3) |
P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
…………………………................................
W.P.(C)No. 37574 of 2025 ….........................................................
Dated this the 26th day of March 2026 J U D G M E N T It is aggrieved by the coercive steps taken by respondents 1 and 2 under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 , this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner.
2. There is no representation for the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the interim order passed by this Court has not been complied with by the petitioner It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
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
