This writ appeal was filed against a judgment dismissing a writ petition challenging proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. The Court held the writ appeal was not maintainable as the petitioner failed to comply with an earlier direction to deposit an amount in instalments.
The writ appeal was dismissed with no orders as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2015/11TH ASHADHA, 1937
WA.No. 934 of 2015 IN WP(C).7819/2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7819/2015 DATED 12-03-2015
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS :
BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
R1 & R2 BY SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM
R3 & R4 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT. GIRIJA GOPAL.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ASHOK BHUSHAN, Ag.C.J. & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
W.A. No. 934 OF 2015
JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, Ag.C.J.
This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 12.03.2015 passed in W.P.(C) No.7819 of 2015 by which order the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.
has stated that against the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, the writ petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(C) No.14050 of 2014 which was disposed of on 25.06.2014, permitting the petitioner to deposit the outstanding amount in 10 equal monthly instalments. It is stated by learned Single Judge that the said order was not complied with and the second writ petition has been filed where substantially same reliefs are claimed.
rightly dismissed the writ petition. Substantially for the same reliefs a second writ petition is not maintainable, more so,
W.A. No. 934 of 2015
-:2:-
when the petitioner failed to comply with the earlier direction issued by this Court on 25.06.2014.
We do not find any error in dismissing the writ
petition. Hence the Writ Appeal is dismissed.
Ashok Bhushan, Acting Chief Justice.
A.M. Shaffique, Judge.
ttb/02/07
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a second writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has failed to comply with an earlier order permitting instalment payment.
Whether the Single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition which sought reliefs already granted earlier.
Lijimol.K.D.
Chandrika
The Mattanchery Mahajanik Co Operative Urban Bank Ltd.
The Authorised Officer (Under SARFAESI Act) The Mattanchery Mahajanik Co Operative Urban Bank Ltd.
The District Collector Ernakulam
Department of Co-operation, Office of the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies
Ashok Bhushan
A.M. Shaffique
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
