Kerala High Court
WP(C)/14157/2025 of SAJUKUMAR S., Vs THE BRANCH MANAGER, on 4 April 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 14157 OF 2025 PETITIONER: SAJUKUMAR S., AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.SADASIVAN ASSARI,RESIDING AT MEENAKSHI BHAVAN, VEILOOR, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 14157 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SAJUKUMAR S.,
AGED 42 YEARS,
S/O.SADASIVAN ASSARI,RESIDING AT MEENAKSHI BHAVAN, VEILOOR, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695302.
BY ADVS.
B.KRISHNA MANI
N.V.SANDHYA
MAHADEV M.J.
RESPONDENTS:
THE BRANCH MANAGER,
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,ANOOPARA BRANCH, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695024.
RAJESH S.R,
AGED 46 YEARS,
S/O.SURENDRA BABU, S.S. NIVAS, GANDHI SMARAKAM, PERUMKUZHY P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695305.
SUGESH,
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.SURENDRA BABU,S.S. NIVAS, GANDHI SMARAKAM, PERUMKUZHY P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695305.
SRI. SUNIL SHANKAR, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be a tenant in respect of certain premises, which are mortgaged to the respondent Bank. A perusal of the pleadings in the writ petition do not indicate that the petitioner is claiming under any registered lease deed. It is settled that a tenant cannot oppose the proceedings taken by a Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act to take physical possession of the secured assets if the tenant is not claiming under a registered lease deed executed prior to the date of creation of the mortgage. If the lease is entered into after date of creation of mortgage, there must also be material to show that the tenancy was created with the permission of the Bank. Both these conditions are absent in the facts and circumstance of this Court.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank also submits that possession of the secured asset has already been taken. Therefore applying the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Bajarang Shyamsunder Agarwal v. Central Bank of India and Another [(2019) 9 SCC 94] and Hemraj Ratnakar Salian v.
HDFC Bank Ltd. and Others [AIR 2021 SC 3880], this writ petition will stand dismissed in limine. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14157/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RENT DEED DATED 19/1/2014 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE O.S. 626/2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF’S COURT, ATTINGAL DATED 22/11/2024. Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27-11- 2024 IN I.A.NO.1/2024 IN O.S.NO.626/2024 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT ATTINGAL