Disposed

Antony Lasar v. Secretary

Kerala HC27 Nov 2018WP(C)/31168/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 seeking relief from overdue bank dues, the High Court permitted the petitioner to clear his overdraft liability of Rs.29,58,961/- in ten monthly instalments. Recovery proceedings were stayed upon suo motu contingent directions subject to timely payment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to pay total dues and future interest in ten equal monthly instalments starting 13.12.2018; recovery proceedings stayed upon timely payment; default leads to resumption of recovery proceedi

Antony Lasar Vs Secretary — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

MR.ANTONY LASAR AGED 55 YEARS, S/O LASAR, THOOLIKA HOUSE, AYIRAMTHENGU, KUDIKKADA P.O., KOLLAM- 691 303

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.LIZA P.CHERIAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

SECRETARY REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK, MAYYANADU, KOLLAM -691 303

¶11

BY ADVS. SMT.A.JANI SRI.G.SIVASANKAR

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner, who availed an overdraft facility for Rs.15 lakhs from the respondent Bank, which is a Society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969 and the rules made thereunder, after mortgaging his property having an extent of 4 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.136 (Re-Survey No.144/8 Block No.AP-13-550) of

¶17

Adhichanallur Village, has filed this writ

¶18

petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to permit him to pay the overdue amount in instalments.

¶19

On 25.09.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed post to the respondent

¶20

returnable within three weeks.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the

¶22

petitioner and also the learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

¶23

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶24

¶25

The learned counsel for the respondent

¶26

Bank, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner availed overdraft facility for Rs.15 lakhs from the Bank on 31.10.2012, which was to be

¶27

repaid in five years. However, the petitioner failed to repay the same and in such circumstances, recovery proceedings have been initiated, which has resulted in Ext.P2 demand notice issued by the Bank. The learned counsel would also submit that the total liability in respect of the overdraft facility, as on date, comes to Rs.29,58,961/- and if the petitioner is prepared to pay off the entire dues together with interest in monthly instalments, the respondent Bank has no objection in this Court granting him an opportunity to effect such repayment within a period of ten months.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner

¶29

would submit that the petitioner is prepared to

¶30

pay off the entire dues, together with future

¶31

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶32

¶33

interest in monthly instalments.

¶34

Having considered the submissions made by

¶35

the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶36

i) The petitioner shall pay off the entire dues amounting to Rs.29,58,961/- in respect of the overdraft facility in question covered by Ext.P2 demand notice, together with future interest from this date, in ten equal monthly instalments commencing from 13.12.2018 and the subsequent instalments payable on or before the 13^th day of the

¶37

succeeding months.

¶38

ii) If the petitioner is remitting the aforesaid instalments in time, without any default, all recovery proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 demand notice shall be kept in abeyance, so as to enable the

¶39

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶40

¶41

petitioner to pay off the entire dues as above.

¶42

iii) In case of any default committed by the petitioner in remitting any one of the instalments as above, it will be open to

¶43

the 2^nd respondent to proceed with recovery steps pursuant to Ext.P2 demand notice, in accordance with law.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

ANIL K.NARENDRAN,JUDGE

¶46

AV/27/11

¶47

WP(C).No. 31168 of 2018

¶48

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 20.5.2017. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

Antony Lasar v. Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony Lasar v. Secretary

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

Sherly Chacko Vs Anicadu Service Co-Operative Bank

Omana Vs the District Collector, Pathanamthitta

K.Ravunni Vs the Secretary, Pattambi Govt. Employees Co-Operative Society Ltd. No.P 614

M.P.Basheer Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Siddique Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Sobhakumari L. Vs State of Kerala