Allowed

Mayinkutty v. the Thalappilly Taluk Primary Co-Operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd. No. 1354

Kerala HC13 Jul 2016WP(C)/20558/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding recovery of a loan with admitted default, the High Court of Kerala allowed the petitioner to repay outstanding amounts in ten equated monthly installments, directed the bank to provide an account statement, and reserved the right to proceed with sale proceedings upon default.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to repay outstanding amounts in 10 equated monthly installments; 1st respondent directed to provide statement of accounts as on 30.06.2016.

Mayinkutty Vs the Thalappilly Taluk Primary… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2016/22ND ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 20558 of 2016 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

MAYINKUTTY, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. MOIDU, KURUNCHAMAYIL HOUSE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, PILAKKAD P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL SMT.R.RAJITHA SMT.VINAYA V.NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENTS :

¶10

THE THALAPPILLY TALUK PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE

¶11

AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO. 1354,

¶12

WADAKKANCHERY - 680 582, REP. BY ITS MANAGER.

¶13

THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER, THALAPPILLY TALUK PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE

¶14

AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO 1354,

¶15

WADAKKANCHERY - 680 582

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Skk

¶18

WP(C).No. 20558 of 2016 (T)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶21

EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF SALE NOTICE DATED 20/5/16 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

SKK

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶27

W.P.(C)NO.20558 OF 2016

¶28

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P1 recovery action initiated by the first respondent bank to recover the amounts outstanding against a loan provided to the petitioner. Loan availed is admitted, default is admitted and the outstanding amounts are also admitted by the petitioner. However, petitioner seeks indulgence of this court to permit the petitioner to pay the amounts in equated monthly installments. Even though, notice is served on the respondent bank, there is no appearance.

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Since in spite of service of the notice, the bank has not appeared. I do not think that the bank has any objection to the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in

¶32

this writ petition. Therefore, the petitioner is

¶33

¶34

W.P.(C)NO.20558 OF 2016

¶35

permitted to repay the outstanding amounts claimed in Ext.P1 along with interest. As per the interim order of this court, learned counsel submitted that petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only). Therefore, petitioner is permitted to pay the balance amount in 10 equated monthly installments starting from 05.08.2016 and on the same day of the subsequent months. Needless to say, if any of the installments are defaulted by the petitioner, the bank will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with Ext.P1 sale proceedings. In order to enable the petitioner to pay the outstanding amounts in equated monthly installments, first respondent shall provide a statement of accounts to the petitioner as on 30.06.2016 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶36

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

sd/-

¶38

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶39

R.AV

Mayinkutty v. the Thalappilly Taluk Primary Co-Operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd. No. 1354

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayinkutty v. the Thalappilly Taluk Primary Co-Operative Agriculture & Rural Development Bank Ltd. No. 1354

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

Ashraf P Vs the Secretary

Dominic Zacharias Vs a.T.James

Monse Mathew Vs Karukachal Rural Co-Operating

S. Sarath Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)

K.Baby Vs Ottapalam Block Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd.No.P 608

Krishnan Vs Edakode Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. NO.2523