Dismissed

Ajith Kumar.M.K. v. Vaikom Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.1193

Kerala HC23 Jul 2012RP/663/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this order, Justice Antony Dominic dismissed a review petition seeking to condone a 92-day delay. The petitioner challenged the stance that the impugned order, which granted instalment facility, differed from the prayed relief of loan regularisation.

What did the court decide?

The review petition and the application to condone delay were dismissed; no direction to regularise loan was granted.

Ajith Kumar.M.K. Vs Vaikom Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd… — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2012/1ST SRAVANA 1934

¶5

RP.No. 663 of 2012 (L)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.3513/2012 DATED 21-02-2012.

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC:

¶8

AJITH KUMAR. M.K., KAY GEES HOUSE, THALAYOLAPARAMBU, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 141.

¶9

BY SRI.N.SUKUMARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. ADVS. SRI.S.SHYAM, SRI.N.K.KARNIS.

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:

¶11

1. VAIKOM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.1193, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,

¶12

VAIKOM P.O., PIN: 686 141.

¶13

2. BRANCH MANAGER, THALAYOLAPARAMBU BRANCH OF

¶14

VAIKOM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.1193, THALAYOLAPARAMBU P.O., PIN:686 605.

¶15

3. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER UNDER ACT 54 OF 2002

¶16

OF THE VAIKOM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1193, VAIKOM P.O., PIN: 686 141.

¶17

4. SRI.SABU GEORGE, AUTHORIZED OFFICER UNDER ACT 54 OF 2002 OF

¶18

THE VAIKOM URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.1193, VAIKOM P.O, PIN: 686 141.

¶19

BY ADV. MR.JULIAN XAVIER, SC.

¶20

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

rs.

¶22

RP.No. 663 of 2012 (L)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶25

ANNEXURE A1	COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 31/03/2012 FOR PAYMENT OF Rs.30,000/-.
ANNEXURE A2	COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30/04/2012 FOR PAYMENT OF Rs.30,000/-.
ANNEXURE A3	COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20/06/2012 FOR PAYMENT OF Rs.30,000/-.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rs.

ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ C.M.Appln.No.109 OF 2012 in

¶31

R.P.NO.663 OF 2012 & R.P.NO.663 OF 2012 IN W.P.(C) NO. 3513 OF 2012

¶32

=====================

¶33

Dated this the 23^rd day of July, 2012

¶34

O R D ER

¶35

This review petition has been filed with an application to condone the delay of 92 days. The writ petition was filed and judgment was obtained enabling the petitioner to discharge the liability due to the Bank in instalments. In para 3 of the judgment, this Court has also specifically noted that the prayer made by the petitioner was only for an instalment facility. It is thereafter that this review has been filed and what is now sought for by the petitioner is a direction to the Bank to regularise the loan.

¶36

Having gone through the affidavit seeking condonation of delay, in my view, no explanation muchless any satisfactory explanation has been given to condone the delay. Even otherwise, since the judgment has been rendered accepting the request made by the petitioner, there is also no error in the

¶37

C.M.Appln.No.109 OF 2012 in R.P.NO.663 OF 2012 & R.P.NO.663 OF 2012 IN W.P.(C) NO. 3513 OF 2012 :2 :

¶38

judgment warranting review.

¶39

Therefore, both the C.M.Appln and the review petition will stand dismissed.

¶40

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶41

Ajith Kumar.M.K. v. Vaikom Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.1193

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajith Kumar.M.K. v. Vaikom Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.1193

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

Moyin Kutty Vs the Secretary, Vazhayoor Grama Panchayath

P.J.Antony Vs Spcices Board

Thresia Vs Karukutty Grama Panchayath

Kerala Hockey Association Vs the Kerala State Sports Council

K.P.Alexander Vs the State of Kerala

Shaiju Vs Corporation of Trivandrum