Salmath v. I.D.C.B.
Case brief
What is this about?
This review petition was dismissed as the petitioner could approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, meaning no error appeared on the face of the record.
What did the court decide?
The Review Petition is dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
RP.No. 710 of 2013 () IN WP(C).34376/2011
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34376/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
SALMATH AGED 34 YEARS W/O.IBRAHIM, MAROTTICKAL HOUSE ADIMALY KARA, MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE DEVIKULAM TALUK IDUKKI DISTRICT
BY ADV. SRI.PADAYATTEE YELDO
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
- IDUKKI DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK ADIMALY BRANCH REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER
AUTHORISED OFFICER (SPECIAL RECOVERY OFFICER) HEAD OFFICE I.D.C.B. IDUKKI COLONY P.O 685 602.
- M.A. IBRAHIM, S/O.IBRAHIM MAROTTICAKAL (H), ADIMALY PO 685 561 MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Review Petition reveals any error apparent on the face of the record warranting review.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SALMATH
- respondent
IDUKKI DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK ADIMALY BRANCH
- respondent
M.A. IBRAHIM
- respondent
P.B. BIJU
- respondent
M.A. NAZAR
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court