Disposed

State Bank of India v. Beevi Asura

Kerala HC1 Feb 2007RP/70/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court entertained a review petition filed by a bank challenging an earlier order granting more installment facilities than demanded. The Court reduced the facility to 24 installments or allowed higher installments contingent on payment of the current lending rate of interest on accrued arrears.

What did the court decide?

Review disposed reducing installment facility to 24 installments; alternatively 12,500/month if current lending rate paid on arrears.

State Bank of India Vs Beevi Asura — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2007 / 12TH MAGHA 1928

¶5

RP.No. 70 of 2007(D)

¶6

-------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.32585/2006 Dated 07/12/2006

¶7

: REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2

¶8

¶9

STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM.

¶10

STATE BANK OF INDIA, VALIATHURA BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA

¶12

RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS 1 AND 2

¶13

¶14

BEEVI ASURA, W/O. SHAMSUL HUDHA, AGED 35, T.C.46/511, SANGEERA PALACE, COLONY STREET, TRIVANDRUM.

¶15

SHAMSUL HUDHA, T.C.46/511, SANGEERA PALACE, COLONY STREET, TRIVANDRUM.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶19

R.P. NO. 70 OF 2007 in WPC 32585 of 2006

¶20

Dated, this the 1^st day of February, 2007

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The respondent bank has filed this review petition stating that the Court has granted installment facility more than what the petitioner demanded from the Bank. It is seen that the petitioner’s demand was only for 24 installments from the Bank. I find force in the contention of the Bank, more so, if the rate of interest is less than the current lending rate. Installment facility granted by the Court operates virtually as a fresh loan arrangement. Therefore, if the defaulter pays current lending rate of interest, then I feel, the same will protect the interest of the Bank because the loan is covered by adequate security. In the circumstance, the review petition is disposed of reducing the installment facility granted to 24 or in the alternate if the petitioner wants to avail installment facility @ Rs. 12,500/- per month, then petitioner will pay current lending rate of interest on accrued arrears along with installments. The defaulter will meet the Manager of the Bank, after the Bank informs the defaulter the current lending rate of interest, and convey to him the option exercised by petitioner.

¶23

This review petition is disposed of as above.

¶24

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.

¶25

State Bank of India v. Beevi Asura

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Beevi Asura

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kerala Civil Aviation General Workers Vs Union of India

Viswanatha Pillai.D. Vs Manager,K.S.E.F.,Adoor Branch

Mohammad Iqbal Vs State of Kerala

Keralastate Vs P.G.Jagannivasan

P.Sankaran Vs the Director of Fisheries,Kollam

The Executive Engineer Vs S.Sadanandan