Partly allowed

Gopakumar v., v. the Branch Manager, Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Bank

Kerala HC5 Nov 2019WP(C)/13027/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition where the petitioner sought relief in lieu of loan installments. It granted liberty to request the bank for installments contingent on an immediate deposit of Rs.6,00,000 and directed a stay of coercive recovery for six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to request installments from the Bank within two weeks and directed to deposit Rs.6,00,000 within four weeks, upon which the Bank shall consider the request.

Gopakumar v., Vs the Branch Manager… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

GOPAKUMAR V., AGED 48 YEARS S/O.VIKRAMAN, GOWRI GOPALAM, PRA-165, OPP.K.V.SUB STATION, PUNNAKKAMUGAL, ARAMADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 032.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.ABDUL RASHEED

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE BRANCH MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, PUTHENCHANTHA, M AND E, PULIMOOD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

¶11

2 THE MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

¶12

3 AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, PUTHENCHANTHA, M AND E, PULIMOOD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

R1 BY SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SC THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. CO.OP BANK

¶14

R2-3 BY SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SC THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. CO.OP BANK

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶17

-2-

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 5th day of November 2019

¶20

Heard Adv.M.Abdul Rasheed for petitioner and Adv.Thomas

¶21

Abraham, Standing Counsel for respondents.

¶22

The petitioner prays for the following reliefs:-

¶23

i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay the loan amount in installments that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.;

¶24

ii) Grant the petitioner such other and further reliefs which this Hon'ble Court deems just and fit under the circumstances of the case.”

¶25

The petitioner states that the petitioner in spite of

¶26

adverse market conditions and insufficient cash flow; is interested in clearing the loan account. For the said purpose the petitioner

¶27

seeks indulgence of this Court to grant reasonable time to clear the outstanding amount.

¶28

Adv.Thomas Abraham appearing for respondents

¶29

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶30

-3-

¶31

submits that the writ petition is filed without making such request before the respondent Bank. The petitioner, if proves bona fides in clearing the outstanding amount, the Bank has no difficulty in considering the request of petitioner. It is argued that the instalments are agreed terms between the parties under the loan agreement and are binding unless otherwise changed on mutually agreed terms. In exceptional circumstances, this Court can grant additional instalments or reschedule the agreed instalments. But the case on hand does not present such exceptional circumstances. The petitioner, if proves bona fides , the respondent Bank would certainly consider the request of petitioner for granting or rescheduling the instalments.

¶32

The submissions made by the learned counsel are noted. The petitioner, since is not pressing the writ prayers, this Court is not proposing to examine the objection raised by respondents, namely substituting instalments in the place of already agreed instalments or change time schedule in exercising

¶33

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶34

-4-

¶35

its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Keeping in perspective the stand of the Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Bank and to meet the ends of justice, I am satisfied with the consent of counsel appearing for the respondents, the Writ Petition can be disposed of by this order.

¶36

(a) The petitioner is given liberty to request, within two weeks from today, the respondent Bank by enclosing a copy of this judgement, for granting instalments/time for payment of the outstanding amount.

¶37

(b) The petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.6,00,000/(Rupees Six lakhs only) within four weeks from today. (c) Upon the petitioner complying with the said conditions, the respondent Bank considers the request of petitioner for granting instalments/time as may be warranted in this behalf.

¶38

(d) The instalments so facilitated by the respondent Bank, it is needless to observe, shall be independent of other

¶39

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶40

-5-

¶41

obligation under the loan agreement.

¶42

(e) A decision on the request is taken and communicated

¶43

to petitioner within six weeks from today.

¶44

(f) The respondents are directed not to take coercive steps

¶45

for six weeks from today subject to petitioner complying with the above direction for.

¶46

(g) The petitioner if fails to comply with the condition of depositing Rs.6,00,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs only), the respondent bank is free to proceed in accordance with law.

Sd/-

S.V.BHATTI

JUDGE

WP(C).No.13027 OF 2019(C)

¶52

-6-

¶53

APPENDIX

¶54

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶55

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18/6/2016 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK.

Gopakumar v., v. the Branch Manager, Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopakumar v., v. the Branch Manager, Thiruvananthapuram District Co-Operative Bank

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

M.J.Lali, Vs B.Andrews Prabhu

Balakrishnan.T Vs the Kottakkal Co-Operative Urban Bank Limited

Mariyumma Vs the Authorised Officer

Asok Kumar Vs Karamana Co-Opeartive Urban Bank Ltd.

Hyder Ali K., Vs the Authorised Officer

Kochi Refinery Evictees Construction Workers' Association (C.R.E.C.W.a) Vs M/S.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited-Kochi Refinery