Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Lalu vs State Bank Of

High Court Of Kerala|02 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:-
“(a) Appropriate order or direction to quash Exts.P1 and P2.
(b) Appropriate order or direction to the respondents to keep in abeyance all further proceeding of sale of the properties pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices.
(c) Appropriate order or direction to the respondents to revive and to Re Phase loan accounts numbers MTC 6727669874, Cash Credit account no 6727676268, ATC account no 67160967158, ATL (KGC) no 67185662068, ACC no 67130199893, ACC no 67130200061, pending in dues at the respondent bank, so as to pay the instalments in tune with the original agreement already entered in to.
(d) Appropriate order or direction to the respondents to grant sufficient time/instalments to pay the defaulted monthly loan instalments in loan accounts numbers MTC 6727669874, Cash credit account no 6727676268, ATC account no 67160967158, ATL (KGC) no 67185662068, ACC no 67130199893, ACC no 67130200061.”
2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 18.11.2014, the following order was passed.
WP(C)28077 of 2014 2 Learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits with reference to the statement filed that, altogether 'seven' loans are there with the involvement of the petitioner and if a sum of ₹15 lakhs (Rupees Fifteen lakhs only) is paid on or before 30.11.2014, the accounts can be upgraded with further remittances to be made regularly as given in paragraph '6'.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for time to get instructions. Post on 25.11.2014.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that the condition imposed by this Court could not be satisfied.
4. After hearing both the sides, this Court does not find it as a fit case to call for interference, invoking the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to pursue other appropriate remedy, if any, in accordance with law. It is always open for the petitioner to approach the Bank and to have the issue settled amicably, subject to appropriate terms.
stu Sd/-
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON , JUDGE.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Lalu vs State Bank Of

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
02 December, 2014
Judges
  • P R Ramachandra Menon
Advocates
  • Sri
  • T N Manoj