Naushad Zackaria Sait vs The Authorised Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 23101 Ker

Kerala High Court

Naushad Zackaria Sait vs The Authorised Officer on 1 August, 2024

Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque

Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque

WA NO. 1094 OF 2024
                                   1

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
  THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                   &
                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
     THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1946
                          WA NO. 1094 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.25599 OF 2024 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/S:

          NAUSHAD ZACKARIA SAIT
          AGED 66 YEARS
          S/O ZACKARIA, SANTHI NAGAR COLONY, KOOVAPADAM,
          MATTANCHERY, KOCHI, PIN - 682002

          BY ADV RAJESH NAIR



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
          THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.., REGIONAL OFFICE AT DOOR
          NO. 20A, WARD NO. 63, 1ST FLOOR, FLAT NO.1, PARK
          STREET, P.O. KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL, PIN - 700016

    2     THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
          REGD. HEAD OFFICE AT SIB HOUSE, T.B. ROAD, MISSION
          QUARTERS, THRISSUR- REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
          DIRECTOR., PIN - 680001

    3     THE BRANCH MANAGER
          THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.., PLOT NO. 9/16, BISHOP'S
          HOUSE COMPOUND, OPP. BIG BAZAR, SATYA NAGAR,
          BHUBANESWAR, ORISSA, PIN - 751007

          SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE


     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA NO. 1094 OF 2024
                                        2

                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1ST day of August 2024

A.Muhamed Mustaque, Acg.C.J.

The appellant is a borrower, who borrowed money from the

respondent bank for an industrial unit in Bhuvaneswar. He also

challenged the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act before the Tribunal

in Odisha. In a challenge made before this Court, learned Single Judge

was of the view that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain

the writ petition. Merely because one of the secured assets is located in

Kerala does not mean that the entire transaction has taken place within

the State.

2. The loan agreement and the contract were entered into in

Odisha and the title deeds were deposited with the branch in Odisha. We

therefore, affirm the judgment of the learned Single Judge.

The writ appeal is dismissed holding that this Court has no

jurisdiction to entertain this writ appeal.

Sd/ A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE sd/

S.MANU JUDGE jm/