Dismissed

Yedhu Krishnan v. the Federal Bank Ltd.

Kerala HC3 Feb 2016WP(C)/582/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 challenging bank recovery steps, the petitioner failed to comply with an interim order requiring payment of Rs.5,00,000/- within two weeks. The court held that no discretionary relief could be granted due to non-compliance, resulting in the dismissal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no relief granted to petitioner.

Yedhu Krishnan Vs the Federal Bank Ltd. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/14TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).NO. 582 OF 2016 (W)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

YEDHU KRISHNAN, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.K.VASUDEVAN, KOLLAYIL HOUSE, CHEMBARA P.O PALAKKAD.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.VINOD MS.JENCY SUSAN JOSE SRI.V.SRI NATH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD. REP. BY THE CHIEF MANAGER, PULAMANTHOLE BRANCH PALAKKAD 678 001.

¶11

2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, 8TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI 36.

¶12

R1 BY ADV. SRI.LAWRENCE D'CUNHA R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.MADHUSOODANAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW BONSTANE R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.G.PAUL R1 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JACOB (KUNNATHU) R1 BY ADV. SRI.GODWIN JOSE

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C).NO. 582 OF 2016 (W)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶17

------------------------P1- THE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PROPORTIONATE SHARE OWNED BY THE PETITIONER

¶18

P2- THE COPY OF THE SALE PROCLAMATION PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶19

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶20

//TRUE COPY//

¶21

P.A TO JUDGE

¶22

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶23

.............................................................

¶24

W.P.(C).No.582 Of 2016

¶25

.............................................................

¶26

Dated this the 3^rd day of February, 2016

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

The petitioner had approached this Court aggrieved by the steps taken by the respondent bank under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act for recovery of defaulted loan amounts. When the matter came up for admission, this Court by an interim order granted a stay against dispossession, on condition that, the petitioner paid an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- within two weeks from 07.01.2016, the date of the interim order. When the matter was taken up for orders today, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner did not comply with the directions in the interim order passed by this Court. Under the said circumstances, I am of the view that, the petitioner cannot seek any discretionary relief from this Court in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶29

Resultantly, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶32

mns/3.02.16

¶33

W.P.(C).No.2778 Of 2016 2

Yedhu Krishnan v. the Federal Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yedhu Krishnan v. the Federal Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Chithrangathan Vs Renjith K.R.

K.G.Radhamoni Vs v.S.Senthil

Jeeshma C. Vs Mahesh D Dharmadhikari

Antony Jishan Vs the Authorized Officer

Mary Xavier Vs the Secretary to Government

P.P.Mathew Vs the District Collector