Dismissed

Sanjeev K.C., v. B.S.Subha

Kerala HC13 Jan 2020Con.Case(C)/2651/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt of court case filed against a bank officer alleging violation of previous court directions regarding auction sale consideration. The court stated the intent is clear from the prior judgment; upon hearing, the court found no need to proceed further as the petitioner's subsequent remedy had also been dismissed. The court closed the contempt petition without affecting other remedie

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; no order trammelling other remedies.

Sanjeev K.C., Vs B.S.Subha — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941 Con.Case(C).No.2651 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 23872/2019

¶5

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23872/2019(H) DATED 03.09.2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SANJEEV K.C., AGED 61 YEARS S/O.CHARLES, PRISM CASTING NO.7 D, KOWDIAR MANOR, JAWAHAR NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM-695003.

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.LIZA P.CHERIAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

B.S.SUBHA, AGED 46 YEARS W/O.SUJITH RAJAGOPAL, AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, 1ST FLOOR, PUKALAKKATTU LAKSHMIBHAI TOWES, TD ROAD NORTH END, ERNAKULAM-682011.

¶11

R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL R1 BY ADV. SMT.M.J.RAJASREE R1 BY ADV. SRI.ANIRUDH KADAVIL SMT.S.AMBILY – SC

¶12

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

COC 2651/19

JUDGMENT

This COC has been filed alleging that in

¶17

spite of the directions in the judgment dated

¶18

03.09.2019, respondent-Bank accepted the

¶19

balance sale consideration from the auction purchaser.

¶20

allegations and averments made in this COC

¶21

since the intent of this Court is clear from

¶22

the judgment and if the petitioner has a case that the Bank has acted contrary to the same, it is up to him to invoke his remedies as per law; particularly because, it is conceded that the Securitisation Application filed by him subsequently has also been dismissed.

¶23

In the afore circumstances, I close this

¶24

COC, however, without, in any manner,

¶25

trammelling the other remedies available to the petitioner.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

COC 2651/19

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶34

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3.9.2019. ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT. ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER. ANNEXURE 4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CORRIGENDUM PUBLISHED IN NEWSPAPER. ANNEXURE 5 TRUE COPY OF ARGUMENT NOTES. ANNEXURE 6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN SA.NO.285/2019 DATED 23.12.2019.

Sanjeev K.C., v. B.S.Subha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev K.C., v. B.S.Subha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Abdul Khader Vs Binu G.

Mohammed Abdul Khader Vs Binu G.

Stella Raphel, Vs Mujeeb Rehman

Siddi, Vs Harison Malayalam Ltd.

Saraswathi Vs Kamalakshiamma

M.K.Prakasan, Vs Rani George