Dismissed

Julie K.Varghese v. Pathanamthitta District Co-Operative Bank, Represented by It'S General Manager

Kerala HC10 Jul 2018WP(C)/20252/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner assailed bank notices regarding outstanding loan dues. Court observed Article 226 jurisdiction does not compel banks to agree to instalments via contractual modification. However, on the bank's own offer to accept ten monthly instalments, court directed bank to regularise account accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to pay outstanding dues via ten equal monthly instalments; Bank agreed to regularise account subject to timely payment.

Julie K.Varghese Vs Pathanamthitta District… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 20252 of 2018

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER

¶8

JULIE K.VARGHESE, S/O K C VARGHESE, KAKKAMPARAMPIL HOUSE, VENNIKULAM P O,THIRUVALLA (VIA), MALLAPPALLY THALUK PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689544.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, REPRESENTED BY IT'S GENERAL MANAGER

¶12

PATHANAMTHITTA P O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶13

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK PURAMATTAM BRANCH, VENNIKULAM P O, THIRUVALLA (VIA),

¶14

MALLAPPALLY THALUK PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT -689544.

¶15

BY SRI.T.P.PRADEEP, SC

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

K.V.

¶18

WP(C).No. 20252 of 2018 (F)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 24/01/18. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10/01/2018 BY THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 8/3/2018 BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16/5/2018 BY THE RESPONDENT BANK.

¶22

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶23

/TRUE COPY/

¶24

K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE 10.07.2018

¶25

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(C). No.20252 of 2018

¶28

====================================== Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2018

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent Bank, apart from perusing the record.

¶31

The petitioner, a borrower from the respondent Bank, assailed Exhibits P1, P2 and P4 notices. The total amount outstanding is stated to be Rs.5,97,506/-.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner, despite her best efforts, could not repay the loan amount because of her stringent financial conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner wants this Court to direct the respondent Bank to receive from the petitioner the outstanding loan amount in instalments.

¶33

W.P.(C). No. 20252 of 2018

¶34

-2-

¶35

Before proceeding further, I may observe that expansive as the jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India is, I am afraid, it does not go to the extent of interdicting the contractual terms, especially in a financial transaction involving public money, so as to compel the respondent Bank to agree for instalments.

¶36

But, being aware of the difficulties involved in realising the loan amounts through invidious sale of the property, the learned counsel for the respondent Bank, on instructions, has submitted that the respondent Bank is willing to regularise the loan account by collecting the outstanding amount in ten equal monthly instalments, along with regular instalments.

¶37

So, based on the Bank's concession, this Court disposes of the writ petition directing the petitioner to pay the accumulated dues, along with regular instalments, in ten

¶38

-3-

¶39

W.P.(C). No. 20252 of 2018

¶40

equal monthly instalments, starting from 07.08.2018. Subject to the petitioner's paying the instalments in the manner indicated above, the respondent Bank, as agreed, will regularise the petitioner's loan account. If the petitioner fails to pay any single instalment within the stipulated time, the respondent Bank can proceed further without recourse to this Court.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE

¶43

Julie K.Varghese v. Pathanamthitta District Co-Operative Bank, Represented by It'S General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Julie K.Varghese v. Pathanamthitta District Co-Operative Bank, Represented by It'S General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musthafa Vs Assistant Commissioner of Customs

Sonu R Vs Assistant Engineer

Hakkim S. Vs the Branch Manager, the Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.

P.Pankajakashan Vs the Deputy Tahsildar (Rr)

M/S. Selfshine Polymers India Private Vs State of Kerlaa

George Mathew Vs Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.