Disposed

C.M.Noordeen and Others v. Union Bank of India & Another

Kerala HC15 Mar 2010WP(C)/3188/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a writ petition challenging coercive recovery under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. The court directed petitioners to pay Rs. 5 lakhs by March 31, 2010, and clear the balance in three equal monthly instalments starting April 30, 2010, while staying coercive proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to pay Rs. 5 lakhs by March 31, 2010, and clear balance in three equal monthly instalments from April 30, 2010. Coercive proceedings stayed.

C.M.Noordeen and Others Vs Union Bank of India & Another — Kerala HC (2010) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2010 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 3188 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

---------------------

¶8

1. C.M. NOORDEEN, S/O. MOHAMMED KUNJU, 4/CHARBOUR CRUST, KURISUPALLY ROAD, RAVIPURAM, COCHIN – 682 015.

¶9

2. HYDER, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, CHETTIKUDIYIL HOUSE, KAVUMKARA, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶10

3. SHABEENA, W/O. HYDER, CHETTIKUDIYIL HOUSE, KAVUMKARA, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU, SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN , SRI.T.R.SADEESAN, SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN, SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED.

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

------------------------

¶14

1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, NODAL REGIONAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN, M.G. ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 035, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER.

¶15

2. THE SENIOR BRANCH MAGAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUVATTUPUZHA BRANCH, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶16

R1 & R2 BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, S.C, UBI.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

prv.

¶19

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J

¶20

W.P(C) No.3188 of 2010-W

¶21

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2010.

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the coercive steps taken by the respondent Bank, invoking the machinery under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act for realization of the amount stated as due from the petitioners. There is also a specific prayer to extend the benefit of 'One Time Settlement', waiving penal interest and to enable the petitioners to satisfy the outstanding liability within a reasonable time.

¶24

The respondents have filed a statement stating that the total outstanding liability as on 5.3.2010 will come around Rs.17,90,065/- and that the Bank has decided to extend concession to the tune of Rs.1,04,688/- confining the claim to Rs.16,85,377/-, on condition that the said amount as satisfied within ten days.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have made a prayer seeking maximum indulgence from the part of the Bank as well. The condition now imposed to avail the concession, making the petitioner to satisfy the liability of an extent

¶26

W.P(C) No.3188 of 2010-W 2

¶27

of Rs.16 lakhs within ten days, is rather an unconscionable suggestion. This is strongly rebutted from the part of the Bank, referring to the contents of Ext.P2, stating that the concession has been offered by the Bank taking note of the entire facts and circumstances and also the specific averment in para 5 of Ext.P2 affidavit-cum-undertaking dtd.13.10.2009 submitted by the petitioners stating that the entire outstanding liability will be cleared on or before '10.2.2010'.

¶28

In the said context, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the because of the pressure of the circumstances and in view of the time required to raise adequate funds, the petitioners would like to forgo the benefit of concession, so as to have breathing time to be provided by this Court for satisfying the entire outstanding liability. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs on or before 31^st of this month and that the entire balance will be cleared by way of 'three' equal monthly instalments commencing from the next month onwards.

¶29

After hearing both the sides, the submission made from the part of the petitioners are recorded and the petitioners are

¶30

W.P(C) No.3188 of 2010-W

¶31

¶32

directed to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs on or before the 31^st of this month. The balance amount shall be cleared by way of 'three' equal monthly instalments; the first of which shall be effected on or before the 30^th of the April 2010; to be followed by similar instalments to be effected on or before the 30^th of the succeeding months. Subject to the above, all further coercive proceedings for recovery of the due amount shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. It is also made clear that, if any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the due amount as above, it will open to the Bank, to proceed with appropriate steps for realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum.

¶33

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶34

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶35

C.M.Noordeen and Others v. Union Bank of India & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.M.Noordeen and Others v. Union Bank of India & Another

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

Suresh Vs District Collector, Thrissur and Others

The Federal Bank Limited Vs Annakutty

Suja Mohan and Others Vs State Bank of Travancore and Another

Satheesh Kumar Vs Indhukaladharan

Mukundan P.P. Vs District Collector

Madhu Vs M/S Punjab National Bank & Another