Disposed¶26

Shereena Shameer, v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC2 Apr 2025WP(C)/9380/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

One time settlement application not considered; State Bank of India; loan account regular, migrated to branch from recovery section; alleged violation of directions in Ext.P4 judgment in WP(C) No. 20099 of 2024; maintainability - separate writ petition not maintainable, remedy is proceedings for violation; writ petition closed; SARFAESI Act s.13(4) possession notice dated 30.05.2024; MC 272 of 2024; representation dated 05.08.2024; Kerala High Court; single judge Gopinath P.; decided same day as admission (02.04.2025).

What did the court decide?

A separate Writ Petition seeking the reliefs claimed on the basis that the bank's stand violates the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P4 cannot be maintained; the petitioner must initiate proceedings alleging violation of the directions in Ext.P4. ¶25

Shereena Shameer, Vs State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2025)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 9380 OF 2025

¶2

¶3

2025:KER:28812

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶7

WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1947

¶8

WP(C) NO. 9380 OF 2025

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

SHEREENA SHAMEER,
AGED 47 YEARS
W/O. SHAMEER M.K., SHAMEER GARDEN, SANU MANZIL, AZEEZ
NAGAR, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695008

¶11

BY ADVS.
NAVANEETH.N.NATH
ABHIRAMI S.
ABDUL LATHEEF P.M.

¶12

RESPONDENT:

¶13

STATE BANK OF INDIA,
NANTHENCODE P.B., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER
(AUTHORIZED OFFICER), SARB, LMS COMPOUND, VIKAS BHAVAN
P.O., PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033

¶14

SRI.TOM K.THOMAS, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 9380 OF 2025

¶17

¶18

2025:KER:28812

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that an application filed by the petitioner for one time settlement has not been considered by the respondent bank.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that the loan account of the petitioner is regular and it is migrated to the branch from the recovery section. It is submitted that in such circumstances there is no question of considering any application for one time settlement.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

¶23

that this stand of the bank is in violation of the orders issued by this Court in Ext.P4.

¶24

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶25

the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank, I am of the view that if the petitioner has a case that the stand now taken by the bank is now in violation of the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P4, it is for the petitioner to initiate proceedings alleging violation of the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P4 and a separate Writ Petition seeking the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition cannot be maintained.

¶26

With that observation, this Writ Petition is closed.

¶27

sd/-

¶28

 GOPINATH P.
JUDGE

¶29

Nsd

¶30

WP(C) NO. 9380 OF 2025

¶31

¶32

2025:KER:28812

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9380/2025

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN MC 272 OF 2024,
DATED 9.04.2024
Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED
30.05.2024 ISSUED UNDER 13(4) OF THE SARFAESI
ACT, 2002
Exhibit P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, DEPICTING
THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 30.05.2024
AFFIXED IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO.20099/2024 DATED 17.07.2024

¶36

Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED
BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT BANK
DATED 05.08.2024

Shereena Shameer, v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shereena Shameer, v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devaki, Vs the Authorized Officer

Mayamol T.T., Vs State Bank of India

Biju D., Vs the Authorized Officer

Harikrishnan K.R., Vs the Manager

Sivakumar, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Ramsheena U., Vs State Bank of India Represented by Its Branch Manager