Kerala High Court
WP(C)/9759/2025 of MOHAMMED LIYAKATHALI, Vs INDIAN BANK LIMITED, on 1 April 2025
W.P (C) N0.9759/2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 9759 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: 1 MOHAMMED LIYAKATHALI, AGED 47 YEARS S/O. MR. ABDU, RAMAMMARAMBIL HOUSE, KANDANATH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 9759 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
MOHAMMED LIYAKATHALI,
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. MR. ABDU, RAMAMMARAMBIL HOUSE, KANDANATH HOUSE, EDAKKARADESOM, PUNNAYURNOW RESIDING AT VILLA 37, STREET
537, ZONE 56 DOHA, QATAR, PASSPORT NO.V 8355 248, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER RASHID S/O.
ABUBACKER, AGED 37 YEARS, THERUVATH HOUSE, EDAKKARA, EDAKKAZHIYOOR, PUNNAYUR P.O., PIN - 679562
FAHIMA,
AGED 45 YEARS
W/O. RAFEEK, MUDAPPILLY HOUSE, EDAYAPPURAM, THURUTHIL
LINE, KEEZHMAD, ALUVA, PIN - 683101
NAISHASHAJAHAN,
AGED 40 YEARS
W/O. SHAJAHAN, CHENTHARA HOUSE, KUTTAMASSERY, ALUVA
EAST VILLAGE P.O., ALUVA P.O., PIN - 683101
BY ADV NIDHIN RAJ VETTIKKADAN
RESPONDENT/S:
INDIAN BANK LIMITED,
M.G. ROAD BRANCH, ERNAKULAM, KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF MANAGER/ AUTHORIZED OFFICER, PIN - 682011
SRI. BINOY VASUDEVAN, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
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.
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent bank under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the SARFAESI Act) to recover the amounts due under several credit facilities availed by the 1st petitioner. The 2nd petitioner is stated to be a tenant in the premises which have been mortgaged for the purposes of securing repayment of the loans and the 3rd petitioner is stated to be a previous owner of the premises in question who is also continuing as a tenant in the premises.
2. This court on 13-03-2025 after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent bank passed the following following order:- “Learned counsel for the respondent Bank to file a statement. Post on 01.04.2025. Taking of physical possession shall stand adjourned till 01.04.2025 on condition that the petitioners remit a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) towards the loan liability by 28.03.2025.”
3. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent bank that no amount has been remitted by the petitioners pursuant to the interim order dated 13-03-2025.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners will handover vacant possession of the premises to the Authorised Officer of the respondent bank within a period of one week from today.
5. This court exercises very limited jurisdiction in matters arising under the SARFAESI Act and since the petitioners have failed to show bona fides by complying with the condition imposed in the interim order dated 13-03-2025, I am of the view that the petitioners are not entitled to any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6. However, taking into account the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that vacant possession of the secured asset shall be handed over to the Authorised Officer of the respondent bank within one week from today (01-04-2025). It is directed that the steps for taking physical possession of the secured shall be deferred for a period of one week to enable the petitioner to handover the secured asset to the Authorised Officer of the respondent bank. If the petitioners fail to handover vacant possession of the secured asset to the Authorised Officer of the respondent bank within a period of one week from today, it is open to the respondent bank to continue with the proceedings for taking possession of the secured asset through the
Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. Writ petition ordered accordingly. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9759/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.08.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF SARFAESI ACT Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOTS OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 07.10.2024 SUBMITTED BYTHE 1ST PETITIONER VIA EMAIL MGROADEKM@INDIANBANK.CO.INTO THE RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE DATED 04.11.2024 AFFIXED BY THE RESPONDENT ON THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OF THE 1ST PETITIONER Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN MC NO.1227 OF 2024 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT(SPECIAL COURT FOR MPS/ MLAS) ERNAKULAM Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSION NOTICE DATED 10.02.2025