Dismissed

Boban Antony and Another v. Union of India & 2 Others

Kerala HC3 Apr 2013WP(C)/8922/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings. The judge held that the petitioners previously received liberty to arrange a private sale and had more than three years to do so, making further pendency unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed without any relief being granted to the petitioners regarding the property sale.

Boban Antony and Another Vs Union of India & 2 Others — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2013/13TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 8922 of 2009 (I)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1. BOBAN ANTONY, AGED 47, S/O.LATE K.D.ANTONY, KURISINKAL HOUSE, NO.119 JAWAHAR NAGAR COLONY, ERANCHIPALAM P.O. KOZHIKODE-673 006.

¶8

2. SOFIFYA BOBAN, W/O.BOBAN, AGED 43, KURISINKAL HOUSE, NO.119 JAWAHAR NAGAR COLONY, ERANCHIPALAM P.O. KOZHIKODE-673 006.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF BANKING AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI.

¶12

2. BANK OF BARODA, KOZHIKODE BRANCH, MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE.

¶13

3. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, BANK OF BORADA, KOZHIKODE BRANCH, MAVOOR ROAD KOZHIKODE.

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 8922 of 2009 (I) ---------------------------

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT.P1. COPY OF PRE-SALE NOTICE PUBLISHED IN MANGALAM DAILY DATED 01.02.2009

¶21

EXT.P2. COPY OF PRE-SALE NOTICE PUBLISHED IN INDIAN EXPRESS DAILY DATED 01.02.2009.

¶22

EXT.P3. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.02.2009 TO THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3

¶23

EXT.P4. COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 6.3.2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3.

¶24

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

/ TRUE COPY /

P.A. TO JUDGE

ANTONY DOMINIC,J

W.P.(C) No.8922 of 2009

¶30

Dated this the 3^rd day of April, 2013

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

This writ petition is filed challenging the SARFAESI proceedings initiated against the petitioners. The only request made by them at the time when the case was considered on 23.03.2009 was to give the petitioners liberty to arrange a private sale of the property. That request was considered and this Court directed that it will be open to the petitioners to arrange private sale of the property and it was clarified that if the petitioners approach the Bank with such a request, the Bank shall allow the same notwithstanding the pendency of this writ petition. Since then more than three years have lapsed and therefore, the petitioner has got every opportunity to arrange private sale of the property as they wanted.

¶33

In such circumstances, I do not see any purpose in keeping the writ petition pending. For these reasons and

¶34

W.P.(c) No.8922 of 2009

¶35

: 2 :

¶36

also for the reason that when the case was taken up, there was no representation or appearance for the petitioners, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶37

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶38

Boban Antony and Another v. Union of India & 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boban Antony and Another v. Union of India & 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irinjalakuda Town Co-Operative Bank Limited Vs Usha Vinodan

Sajeevan Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

Aminakutty Umma Vs Ottapalam Municipality and 2 Others

Abdul Majeed C.K. Vs the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Perumbavoor

K.V. Sanathanan Vs the Tahsildar

T.S.Santhosh Vs M/S.Tamil Nadu Mercantile