The South Indian Bank Ltd vs Lalitha — 400183/2025
Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act Section 14. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 12th March 2026.
MC - MISCELLANEOUS & MAINTENANCE CASE
CNR: KLAL050002602025
e-Filing Number
27-02-2025
Filing Number
259/2025
Filing Date
28-Feb-2025
Registration No
400183/2025
Registration Date
04-Mar-2025
Court
CJM Court Alappuzha
Judge
1-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 25-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.The South Indian Bank Ltd
Adv. JAYAN C DAS
Respondent(s)
-
1.Lalitha
-
2.Jetheesh K J
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alappuzha granted South Indian Bank Limited's petition under the SARFAESI Act 2002 for possession of secured property mortgaged by the respondents, finding they defaulted on loan repayment despite statutory notice under Section 13(2). An advocate commissioner was appointed to take possession after 15 days' notice and hand over the property to the bank, with police assistance available if needed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
16-Jan-2026
Call on
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
20-Nov-2025
For commission report
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
12-Sep-2025
Call on
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
30-Jul-2025
Stayed. Call on
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
30-May-2025
For commission report
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
23-May-2025
For Depositting Batta
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
23-May-2025
Restored
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
23-May-2025
For Depositting Batta
Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
10-Mar-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
28-Feb-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 400183/2025
Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alappuzha granted South Indian Bank Limited's petition under the SARFAESI Act 2002 for possession of secured property mortgaged by the respondents, finding they defaulted on loan repayment despite statutory notice under Section 13(2). An advocate commissioner was appointed to take possession after 15 days' notice and hand over the property to the bank, with police assistance available if needed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts