The petitioner, Ashok Harry Pothen, availed a loan from Indian Bank, which was secured by mortgaging his property. He entered into an agreement with M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. for joint development of the property. M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. was undergoing insolvency proceedings before the Company Law Tribunal, and a resolution plan was approved. The petitioner argued that the bank cannot proceed against his property due to the resolution plan.
Ashok Harry Pothen, the petitioner, obtained a loan from Indian Bank, the respondent. The loan was secured by mortgaging a property belonging to Pothen. Pothen entered into a joint development agreement with M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. for the mortgaged property. M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. underwent insolvency proceedings, and a resolution plan was approved. Pothen argued that the resolution plan barred the bank from proceeding against his property under the SARFAESI Act. The bank contended that it was not a party to the resolution plan and that the plan did not bind it. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. to support his claim that the resolution plan
…Sign in to view the parties.
The writ petition…
True copy of the order…
The petitioner, Ashok Harry Pothen, availed a loan from Indian Bank, which was secured by mortgaging his property. He entered into an agreement with M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. for joint development of the property. M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. was undergoing insolvency proceedings before the Company Law Tribunal, and a resolution plan was approved. The petitioner argued that the bank cannot proceed against his property due to the resolution plan.
Ashok Harry Pothen, the petitioner, obtained a loan from Indian Bank, the respondent. The loan was secured by mortgaging a property belonging to Pothen. Pothen entered into a joint development agreement with M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. for the mortgaged property. M/s. Heera Constructions Pvt. Ltd. underwent insolvency proceedings, and a resolution plan was approved. Pothen argued that the resolution plan barred the bank from proceeding against his property under the SARFAESI Act. The bank contended that it was not a party to the resolution plan and that the plan did not bind it. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. to support his claim that the resolution plan
…The writ petition…
True copy of the order…