Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 16019 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 12556 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 M/S TRT BUILDERS & CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD.
THOPPIL BUILDING, ADAYAMON P.O KILIMANOOR,
THATTUMALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE,
PIN - 695614
2 ANAND VINAYAK
AGED 35 YEARS, S/O G SUNDARESAN,
RESIDING AT KAILAS, KESAVA NAGAR,
HOUSE NO.22, MUNDACKAL WEST, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691 001.
3 SHYLA S
AGED 61 YEARS, W/O G SUNDARESAN,
RESIDING AT KAILAS, KESAVA NAGAR,
HOUSE NO.22, MUNDACKAL WEST, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691 001.
4 AKHIL VINAYAK
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O G SUNDARESAN,
RESIDING AT KAILAS, KESAVA NAGAR,
HOUSE NO.22, MUNDACKAL WEST, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691 001.
BY ADVS.
ASWIN GOPAKUMAR
ANWIN GOPAKUMAR
ADITYA VENUGOPALAN
MAHESH CHANDRAN
SARANYA BABU
ANGITA T. MENON
W.P (C) No.12556 of 2024
:2:
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, BANK OF INDIA,
QUILON BRANCH, USMANIA COMPLEX, PB NO. 513,
KMC XVIII/2884, CONVENT ROAD, QUILON,
PIN - 691 001.
2 BANK OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER,
QUILON BRANCH, USMANIA COMPLEX, PB NO. 513,
KMC XVIII/2884, CONVENT ROAD, QUILON,
PIN - 691 001.
3 ADV. ASWATHY CHANDRAN
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER, MARANNUR ARCADE GROUND
FLOOR, WEST OF CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691 013.
BY ADV
JAWAHAR JOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.12556 of 2024
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of June, 2024
The petitioners, against whom coercive
proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of
Security Interest Act, 2002 by the Bank of India, have filed
the writ petition seeking to restrain the respondents from
taking any further coercive proceedings under Section 13(4)
of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets
and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 against the
petitioners pending filing, scrutiny and listing of the appeal
sought to be filed before the Debts Recovery Appellate
Tribunal, Chennai.
2. After hearing parties on either side, I find that the
petitioners had filed appeal before the Debts Recovery
Appellate Tribunal during March-April, 2024. The petitioners
had all the time to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal, in the
meanwhile.
3. Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 and
2 would submit that the appeal is not listed because the
petitioners have failed to make the pre-deposit under
Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002.
In view of the lapse of time, the writ petition has
become infructuous. The writ petition is therefore dismissed
as infructuous.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE AMR
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!