Jose K.Francis vs The Authorised Officer, Yes Bank ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11014 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.J.DESAI
                               &
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
 THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1945
                     WA NO. 1497 OF 2023
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23475/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF
                            KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WPC:

    1     JOSE K.FRANCIS,
          AGED 61 YEARS
          S/O FRANCIS, KUTTIKKADAN HOUSE, RESIDENCE NO. 81,
          PRIYADARSHINI NAGAR, EAST FORT, THRISSUR- 680 002




          BY ADVS.
          P.M.BINDHUMOL
          PAUL PAULSON T.



RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:

    1     THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
          YES BANK LTD ,
          REG OFFICE AT YES BANK HOUSE,
          OFF WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY,
          SANTACRUZ EAST, MUMBAI, PIN - 400 055

    2     YES BANK LTD,
          THRISSUR BRANCH,
          REP BY CHIEF MANAGER,
          ANSARI COMPLEX, UPPER GROUND FLOOR XXI/459,
          WEST FORT, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 004
 W.A.No.1497 of 2023
                                    2



     3       THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,
             JC FLOWERS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,
             12TH FLOOR, CROMPTON GREAVES HOUSE, DR. ANNIE
             BASANT ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI, PIN - 400 030


OTHER PRESENT:

             SC ADV.PAULOCHAN ANTONY




      THIS    WRIT    APPEAL   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
26.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A.No.1497 of 2023
                                    3



                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of October 2023

A.J. Desai, C.J.

By way of the present appeal filed under section 5 of the

Kerala High Court Act, 1958, the appellant/original petitioner has

challenged the judgment dated 26.07.2023 in W.P.(C)No.23475 of

2023. The judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge reads

as under:

"The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in installments and regularise the loan account.

2. On a perusal of the pleadings and materials on record, it is seen that the respondents have issued Exts.P3 and P4 sale notices as per the contract. The respondents have not invoked the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, 'Act'). In the above background, I am of the definite view that the writ petition as against the respondents is not maintainable.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies in accordance with law."

W.A.No.1497 of 2023

2. Having heard the learned Advocate appearing for the

appellant and considering the fact that the respondents have not

invoked the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, we do not find

any illegality in the impugned judgment.

Hence, the writ appeal is dismissed.

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.

Sd/-

A.J. Desai Chief Justice

Sd/-

V.G. Arun Judge vpv

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE