Disposed

A.K.George v. Retail Assets and Small Medium Enterprises City Credit Centre

Kerala HC16 Sept 2014WP(C)/8403/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court held that since the petitioner lacks local authority permission for the 4th floor, the bank need not disburse loan for it yet. The Court directed the local authority to decide on the petitioner's application within four weeks, making the permit a condition for releasing the remaining loan.

What did the court decide?

Bank ordered to release remainder of loan for 4th floor only if local authority grants permission within 4 weeks of application (to be filed in 10 days).

A.K.George Vs Retail Assets and Small Medium… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MAY 2014/26TH VAISAKHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 8403 of 2014 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

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

¶8

A.K.GEORGE, AGED 57 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, GULF PLAZA, X/44A, KAKKANAD, KOCHI 682 030.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR (KALLESSERIL)

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

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

¶12

RETAIL ASSETS AND SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISES CITY CREDIT CENTRE, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE , SBT BHAVAN, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM 682 036.

¶13

ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED :

¶14

2. THE THRIKKAKKARA MUNISIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT 13/8/2014 IN IA 111/8/2014.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-05-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

¶18

WP(C).No. 8403 of 2014 (A)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

EXHIBIT P1:	COPY OF THE SANCTION OF MEDIUM TERM LOAN IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2:	COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 17/2/2012.
EXHIBIT P3:	COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. OBO(T) NO.2130/21069/2013-14 DATED SEPTEMBER 2/2013.
EXHIBIT P4:	COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/9/2013

¶22

EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 13/9/2013 FOR PLEDGING PETITIONER'S WIFE'S GOLD ORNAMENTS WITH NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 17/9/2013 FOR PLEDGING PETITIONER'S WIFE'S GOLD ORNAMENTS WITH NORTH MALABAR GRAMIN BANK

¶23

EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE REPLY DT 9/7/2014 ISSUED BY THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY

¶24

EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE REPLY AND PSTAL RECEIPT DT 06/06/2014.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

¶26

ANNEXURE R(1):	COPY OF THE LETTER DT 23/12/2013 ISSUED BY THE BANK TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE R(2):	COPY OF THE LETTER DT 26/5/2014 ISSUED BY THE BANK TO THE PETITIONER
ANNEXURE R(3):	COPY OF THE SKETCHES MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BANK BY THE PETITIONER
	//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P.S. TO JUDGE

¶28

¶29

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C).No. 8403 OF 2014

¶32

¶33

Dated this the 16th day of September , 2014

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

This is a matter which relates to disbursement of a loan sanctioned to the petitioner by the respondent Bank. Admitted portion of the loan amount has been released to the petitioner. The bank refused to disburse the remainder on account of the fact that the petitioner has not obtained necessary permission from the local authority to renovate or reconstruct the building which is subject matter of the loan. The bank's stand is that remainder of the loan cannot be disbursed without production of necessary permission from the local authority.

¶36

The local authority has been impleaded as additional 2^nd respondent as per order dated 13/8/2014 in I.A. No.1118/2014. Counsel appearing for the local authority submits that constructions upto 3^rd floor are in regular and order. However, in respect of 4^th floor, no number has been assigned. The stand of the local authority is that the petitioner has not obtained permission in respect of the 4^th

¶37

W.P.(c).No.8903 of 2014 : 2 :

¶38

floor.

¶39

The bank officials has to make inspection of the building in question and get satisfied in respect of the completed work. If the loan amount, which is sought to be disbursed, would cover the works up to 3^rd floor, necessarily the bank has to disburse the amount sanctioned up to the work completed till 3^rd floor. However, in order to extend the loan facility to the 4^th floor, necessarily the petitioner has to submit permission obtained from the local authority regarding the approval of construction of the 4^th floor. In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:

¶40

If the petitioner makes an application before the local authority within a period of ten days from today, the local authority shall consider such application within a period of four weeks thereafter and pass appropriate orders on the same. If permission is granted to the petitioner in respect of the 4^th floor, necessarily the bank has to release the remainder of the loan amount to the petitioner regarding the construction of the 4^th floor in accordance with the agreement of loan.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

dpk

¶43

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, Judge. /True copy/ PS to Judge.

A.K.George v. Retail Assets and Small Medium Enterprises City Credit Centre

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.K.George v. Retail Assets and Small Medium Enterprises City Credit Centre

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

Basid (Minor) Vs Mr.K.C.Sanu

Pramod K. Vs the District Level Authorisation

K.M. John Vs State of Kerala

T.A. Salim Vs State of Kerala

K.v.Damodaran Nair Vs the Chief Manager, State Bank of India

Noordheen Vs the District Collector