Kerala High Court
Aboobacker vs Authorised Officer on 23 February, 2026
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:16906
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
ABOOBACKER,
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMAD HAJI,KALATHIL HOUSE,
NANNAMBRA,CHERUMUKKU,TIRURANGADI,MALAPPURAM, PIN -
676306
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR
SHRI.R.KALESH
SHRI.NIJAZ JALEEL
SHRI.NEERAJ S.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 AUTHORISED OFFICER,
THE TIRUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,F-1616,
TIRUR,MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676101
2 THE TIRUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,
F-1616, TIRUR,MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
PIN - 676101
3 THE MANAGER,
THE TIRUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,F-1616,
TIRUR,MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676101
BY ADV SHRI.M.SASINDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:16906
BASANT BALAJI J
======================
W.P. (C) No. 2890 of 2026
========================
Dated 23rd day of February 2026
JUDGMENT
The petitioner had availed a personal loan in the year 2019 for an
amount of ₹15,00,000/- from the respondent Bank by depositing the
title deed of his property having an extent of 4 Ares and 61 sq. m. in Sy.
No.34/12-44 of Nannambra Village as security. Subsequently, the
petitioner committed default in repayment of the loan amount as per the
agreed terms. In view of the said default, the respondent Bank initiated
recovery proceedings against the secured asset under the provisions of the
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement
of Security Interest Act, 2002. Aggrieved by the measures so initiated by
the respondent Bank under the said Act, the petitioner has approached
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:16906
this Court by filing the present writ petition.
3. An interim order was passed on 27.01.2026 directing the
petitioner to remit Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) within a period
of one week. and coercive steps were deferred.
4. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
amount directed to be remitted as per the order dated 27.01.2026 has not
been paid.
5. In South Indian Bank Ltd. (M/s.) v. Naveen Mathew
Philip [2023 KHC 6435], the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the
remedy available to the petitioner to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal is
a statutory one, and that this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot adjudicate disputed
questions of fact. Hence taking note of the fact of non-compliance as well
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
4
2026:KER:16906
as the above decision, this Writ Petition is dismissed, without prejudice to
the petitioner’s liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE
RMV
WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
5
2026:KER:16906
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 2890 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.12.2025 IN
M.C. NO. 1463/2025 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI
Exhibit-P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER
NOTICE DATED 12.01.2026
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 29.01.2026
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT