Dismissed

K.K.Francis v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC16 Jul 2013WA/1047/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ appeal, the High Court of Kerala rejected the appellants' claim that the instalment period granted for their defaulted housing loan was insufficient. The Court held that no legal right existed to claim such reliefs and refused to interfere with the Single Judge's discretionary order. The appeal was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed without costs, upholding the Single Judge's order allowing recovery in instalments.

K.K.Francis Vs State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2013/25TH ASHADHA, 1935

¶7

W.A.No.1047 of 2013

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No.14899/2013, DATED 13.06.2013 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶9

APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS:-

¶10

K.K.FRANCIS, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.KURIAN, KALANKERIL HOUSE, KUTHIATHODE.P.O., CHERTHALA.

¶11

LISSY FRANCIS, AGED 57 YEARS W/O.K.K.FRANCIS, -DO- -DO-

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.C.G.RAJ KUMAR.

¶13

RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS:-

¶14

STATE BANK OF INDIA,

¶15

SOUTH KUTHIATHODE BRANCH, CHIRAMEL BUILDING, KUTHIATHODE.P.O. - 688 533,

¶16

REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER.

¶17

STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER.

¶18

R1 & R2 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH.

¶19

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

¶20

Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K.Vinod Chandran, J.

¶21

W.A.No.1047 of 2013

¶22

Dated this, the 16^th day of July, 2013

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

K.Vinod Chandran,J.

¶25

The appellants challenged the recovery steps initiated with respect to the default committed in their housing loan account, before the learned Single Judge. The prayer was confined to easy instalments for regularizing the loan account. The learned Single Judge found that the overdue amount, coming to Rs.2,63,120/-, can be permitted to be paid off in four equal monthly instalments, starting from 01.07.2013; on further condition that the equated monthly instalments (EMI) are regularly paid. On compliance of the above condition, the prayer for regularization made as per Exhibit P5 was directed to be considered.

¶26

The appellants are before us claiming that the instalments granted are not sufficient and should be further enlarged. It is to be noticed that there is absolutely no legal right on the appellants to make a prayer for instalments before the

¶27

¶28

W.A.No.1047 of 2013

¶29

learned Single Judge or before us. The learned Single Judge has exercised his discretion in granting a relief of payment of defaulted amounts in instalments and consideration of the prayer for regularization. We do not see any ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge or to further extend the instalments already granted.

¶30

We dismiss the appeal, without costs.

¶31

Sd/Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice

¶32

Sd/K.Vinod Chandran, Judge.

¶33

vku/-

¶34

( true copy )

K.K.Francis v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.K.Francis v. State Bank of India

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 M Vs Kerala Public Service Commission & Other

Institute of Human Resources Development Vs Biju C.

Abdul Samad Vs the Regional Transport Officer, Palakkad

Sthanuprasad Vs Sreekumar

P.K.Prabhakara Kurup Vs State of Kerala and Others

Dr.P.Sureshkumar Vs Director of Higher Secondary Education