✦ Kerala High Court

JOY KURIAKOSE v. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER

W.P.(C) No. 42990 of 2023N NAGARESH4 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Read the judgmentFind similar cases

Judgment

any. The first instalment shall be paid on or before 16.02.2024. W.P.(C)No.42990 of 2023 :6: (ii) If the petitioner commits default in making payments as directed above, the respondents will be at liberty to continue with coercive proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law. (iii) If the petitioner makes payments as directed above, coercive proceedings, if any, against the petitioner shall stand deferred. Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE W.P.(C)No.42990 of 2023 :7: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42990/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 15/11/2023

Find similar cases Start drafting free

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Related cases why they’re linked — not procedural history

  • ROY v. KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  • M.C. CHACKO v. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 · Same Act: Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 · Same Act: Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  • SUNIL JOSE v. STATE BANK OF INDIA KOTTAYAM

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 · Same Act: Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  • ASHOK KUMAR v. AUTHORIZED OFFICER

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  • ABDUL JABBAR K.Z v. THE KASARAGOD CO-OPERATIVE TOWN BANK LIMITED

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Bank had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  • MUHAMMED NASEEM C.K v. M/S. INDUSIND BANK LIMITED

    Kerala High Court

    Same Act: Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 · Same Act: Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

Why is this linked?

More cases under Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

Search all cases citing this act →

Continue researching

Connect this judgment to its cited authorities, statutes, and related legal questions.

Follow cited cases Browse research topics Explore statutes & sections
This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. W.P.(C) No. 42990 of 2023). ← Search more judgments