Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8293 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945
RP NO. 623 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.05.2023 IN WP(C) 15172/2023 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:
1 BANK OF BARODA
HEAD OFFICE, BARODA HOUSE,MANDVI,VADODARA DISTRICT,
GUJ.ARAT,PIN- 39.REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR &
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, REPRESENTED THROUGH AUTHORISED
OFFICER/ CHIEF MANAGER SRI. SHRINIWAS PATHAK, AGED 44
YEARS, S/O. LATE. S.M PATHAK.
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER
BANK OF BARODA, MAKKIYAD BRANCH,NEAR MAKKIYAD P.O,
MAKKJYAD, WAYANAD, PIN: 670 731, REPRESENTED THROUGH
AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER , SRI. SHRIHIWAS
PATHAK, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. LATE. S.M PATHAK.
3 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER
BANK OF BARODA, MAKKIYAD BRANCH, NEAR MAKKIYAD P.O,
MAKKIYAD. WAYANAD, PIN - 670731, REPRESENTED BY SRI.
SHRINIWAS PATHAK, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. LATE. S.M PATHAK,
BY ADV LEO GEORGE
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
ALEXANDER
AGED 47 YEARS
S/0. CHANDY, PULLIKKAMALIL HOUSE, PUDUSSERRY P.O,
KANGIRANGAD VILLAGE,WAYANAD DISTRICT,, PIN - 670 645.
BY ADV. SHAJI CHIRAYATH
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P. No. 623/2023 :2:
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
R.P. No. 623 of 2023
in
W.P.(C) No. 15172 of 2023
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of August, 2023.
JUDGMENT
The review petitioners--Bank of Baroda, the Branch Manager,
Bank of Baroda, the Authorised Officer and Chief Manager, Bank of
Baroda, Wayanad represented by Sri. Shriniwas Pathak, filed the
review petition, seeking a review of the judgment dated
14.05.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 15172 of 2023 contending that the
petitioner in the writ petition has secured the judgment by making
incorrect facts.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioners and
the respondent.
3. When the matter came up for consideration today, the
learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner submits that the
respondent wants to file a Securitization Application (SA) before
the Debt Recovery Tribunal on the basis of the original cause of
action.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this
Court is of the view that there is force in the contention raised by
the review petitioner and therefore, the review petition can be
allowed.
Accordingly, the Review Petition is allowed and the judgment
dated 14.05.2023 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to file,
for judgment.
sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE.
Rv
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!