Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.19 seconds)

T.Bhuvanendran vs Lic Housing Finance Ltd on 24 July, 2009

From the observation made by the Tribunal as above, it is explicitly clear that the Tribunal has taken note of the rights and interest of both the parties concerned. The petitioners need not be aggrieved of the rejection of the IAs for joint trial, as the rights and liberties of the parties to agitate the matter both in the O.A as well as in the S.A stand secured by virtue of the relevant provisions of W.P(C) No.5590 of 2010-W 12 law and the petitioners are at liberty to substantiate their case by raising necessary pleadings and adducing evidence independently, more so, by virtue of the law declared by this Court in Bhuvanendran V. L.I.C Housing Finance Ltd. (2009(4) KLT 72) and other binding judicial precedents as referred to herein before.
Kerala High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 5 - P R Menon - Full Document

V.P.Fakrudheen Haji vs State Bank Of India on 19 December, 2008

7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the proceedings intended to be pursued before the DRT clearly show that an enquiry has to be conducted before adjudication, which involve raising of necessary pleadings as well as adducing evidence. As such, this can't be made an empty formality, by merely examining the correctness as to the steps being pursued by the Bank. Reference is also made to the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in Fakrudheen Haji V. State Bank of India (2009(1) KLT 227), wherein the findings and observations made by the Court have been summarized as follows:
Kerala High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 2 - K T Sankaran - Full Document
1