Disposed

Shaija Nazar v. the Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank

Kerala HC12 Jan 2010WP(C)/359/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition challenging bank recovery proceedings. The court ordered the petitioner to deposit Rs. 2.5 lakhs within the month and clear the remaining liability via four equal monthly installments. Upon compliance, coercive proceedings were stayed. The petition was dismissed anywhere else. The petition was dismissed because the court found that the petitioner wa

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to deposit Rs. 2.5 lakhs and clear balance in four monthly installments by 25/02/2010; coercive proceedings stayed; Bank liberty to proceed on default.

Shaija Nazar Vs the Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 359 of 2010(T)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

SHAIJA NAZAR, AGED 42, W/O.MUHAMMED NAZAR, PADIYATH KARKIDAVALLIYIL, ERIYAD DESOM, ERIYAD VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM, TUDA ROAD, THIRUVAMPADY P.O., THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, THRISSUR.

¶14

THE THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., THRIPRAYAR BRANCH, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶15

THE SALE OFFICER, THRISSUR DISTRICT CO-OP. BANK LTD., SAHAKARANA SATHABDHI MANDIRAM, TUDA ROAD, THIRUVAMPADY P.O., THRISSUR.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OP. SOCIETIES, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶17

THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

BY ADV. MR. P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶21

W.P.(C) No. 359 OF 2010

¶22

......................................................................... Dated this the 12^th January, 2010

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

The petitioner is challenging the recovery proceedings

¶25

pursued by the Bank invoking the machinery under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act and Rules . The case projected in the Writ Petition is that the entire property of the petitioner need not be sold and the petitioner is planning to wipe out the whole liability, if some breathing time is given.

¶26

The learned Counsel for the Bank submits, on

¶27

instruction, that the loan was extended to the petitioner in the year 2005 and because of the chronic default, necessary proceedings were filed before the Assistant Registrar, leading to the 'Award' passed on 20.06.2006. Since the notice issued for realization of the amount did not evoke any positive response, Execution Petition was filed in the year 2008 and further proceedings are going on, which in turn are sought to be challenged by filing the Writ Petition. The learned Counsel for the respondents also submits that the liability will cross more than Rs. Six lakhs as on date and that the request of the

¶28

¶29

W.P.(C) No. 359 OF 2010

¶30

petitioner to grant some more time to clear the liability might not be considered, unless and until the petitioner effects substantial payment towards the existing liability.

¶31

After hearing both the sides, the petitioner is directed

¶32

to deposit a sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs on or before the 31^st of this month and the balance amount with interest and cost shall be cleared by way of '4' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 25.02.2010, to be followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 25^th of the succeeding months. Subject to the above, all further coercive proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. If any default is committed by the petitioner in satisfying the amounts as above, the Bank will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realization of the entire amount in a lump sum.

¶33

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶34

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶35

Shaija Nazar v. the Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaija Nazar v. the Thrissur District Co-Operative Bank

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

N.K.Sunil Kumar Vs Dena Bank

Mohammed Sherief Vs the Joint R.T.O

M/S.Kottkunnel Trader Vs the Assistant Commissioner,Spl.Circle II

E.Usha Vs the Secretary to Govt.& Others

Aslam Agencies Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

M.S.a.Meeran Vs Sales Tax Officer, Kollam