Nallini v. Indian Overseas Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
MADRAS HIGH COURT closed a writ petition challenging a Section 13(4) notice under SARFAESI Act on its own motion as the prayer ceased to survive because of a pending challenge to a sale notice in a connected petition. No costs awarded.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition challenging the possession notice was closed with no costs awarded.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
W.P(MD)No.355 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 14.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.P(MD)No.355 of 2022 and
W.M.P(MD)No.278 of 2022
Nallini
... Petitioner
vs.
Indian Overseas Bank, Having its Main Branch Office at No.1, R.S Road, (New Central Road Dindigul), Dindigul District, Represented by its Branch Manager.
... Respondent
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the possession notice under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act survives given a challenge to the sale notice in a connected petition.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Nallini
- respondent
Indian Overseas Bank
Coram
R.MAHDEVAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court