Allowed

Anil Sooraj v. Government of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Apr 2018WP(C)/7018/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging coercive action for defaulted educational loan, the petitioners were granted liberty to repay the outstanding amount in 10 equated monthly installments. The court also directed the Government to consider the petitioner's application for a State educational loan scheme.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to pay outstanding amounts in 10 equated monthly installments; Government directed to consider scheme application and adjust installments if benefit granted.

Anil Sooraj Vs Government of Kerala — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 7018 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANIL SOORAJ, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.SUMITHRAN, MOOKUZHA HOUSE, NIRAMARUTHUR P.O., TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 109.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.K.S.SMITHA SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE (PLANNING), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.

¶11

2. M/S.CANARA BANK, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 109, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶12

3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 109.

¶13

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NIRAMARUTHUR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 109.

¶14

R1,R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.VINITHA.B R2 BY SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL SRI.P.GOPINATH MENON, SC,

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-04-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts

¶16

5/4/2018

¶17

WP(C).No. 7018 of 2018 (B)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COURSE CERTIFICATE DATED 06.06.2013 ISSUED BY JAWAHARLAL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, MANGALAM, LEKKIDI CERTIFYING COMPLETION OF COURSE CERTIFICATE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE DATED 30.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT EVIDENCING PASSING OF B-TECH DEGREE EXAMINATION VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 30.12.2014.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT BY 2ND RESPONDENT BANK FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.11.2009 TO 26.09.2017.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 7 OF RR ACT DEMANDING A SUM OF RS.3,49,023/- WITH INTEREST @ 15.45%.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 34 OF RR ACT DEMANDING A SUM OF RS.3,49,023/- WITH INTEREST @ 15.45%.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.135/2017 DATED 30.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 26.02.2018 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts 5/4/2018

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶26

W.P.(C) No.7018 of 2018

¶27

----------------------------------------------Dated this the 3^rd day of April, 2018

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Petitioner has availed an educational loan from the 2^nd respondent bank. Repayment was defaulted, consequent to which, coercive action is initiated to recover the amount. It is thus challenging the action of the bank, this writ petition is filed.

¶30

A detailed statement is filed by the 2^nd respondent bank. I am not traversing through the pleadings made by the respective parties in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner that, petitioner is prepared to repay the outstanding amount in reasonable equated monthly installments.

¶31

Taking into account the rival submissions made across the Bar, petitioner is given liberty to pay the outstanding amounts in 10 equated monthly installments starting from 16.4.2018 and on the corresponding date of the succeeding months. Needless to say, if any of the

¶32

W.P.(C) No.7018 of 2018

¶33

¶34

directives are violated, the respondent bank will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and recover the amount in lump.

¶35

Learned Government Pleader pointed out that, petitioner has submitted an application before the Government in order to avail the benefit of a scheme launched by the State Government in respect of educational loans. If the application is in order and if petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the scheme, same shall be extended to the petitioner, after issuing a notice of hearing to the petitioner. If any such benefit is provided to the petitioner by the State Government, 2^nd respondent shall take note of the same and re-adjust the installments in accordance with the order passed by the State Government.

¶36

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶39

smv 4.4.2018

Anil Sooraj v. Government of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Sooraj v. Government of Kerala

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

Mother Superior, Maria Nilayam Convent Vs the State of Kerala

Sherin M Vs State of Kerala

R.Sudhikumar Vs State of Kerala

Johny Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

Joseph Antony Anil Vs Registrar of Companies(Kerala)

Abdul Jabbar K.V. Vs District Collector