Allowed

Beena Musthafa v. Union of India

Kerala HC2 Mar 2020RP/177/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a review petition to modify loan repayment terms. The court directed the bank to accept Rs.10 lakh within seven days and Rs.5 lakh by March 31, 2020, with the balance paid in eight instalments from April 20, due to the petitioner's inability to pay immediately.

What did the court decide?

Modified payment schedule: Rs.10,00,000 within seven days; Rs.5,00,000 by 31.3.2020; balance in eight equal monthly instalments from 20.4.2020.

Beena Musthafa Vs Union of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1941

¶5

RP.No.177 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 22312/2019

¶6

JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22312/2019(L) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC

¶8

BEENA MUSTHAFA AGED 37 YEARS W/O FINIX MENACHERY YACOB,MENACHERY HOUSE,THURAVOOR.P.O, THURAVOOR VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ANGAMALLY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683572.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC

¶11

1 UNION OF INDIA

¶12

REP.BY SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AFFAIRS, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,NEW DELHI-110001.

¶13

2 M/S AXIS BANK LTD, ANGAMALY BRANCH,21/245-B, ANGEL RUDHY TOWER,OPP.ST.JOSEPH HIGH SCHOOL,ANGAMALY683572.

¶14

3 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, M/S AXIS BANK LTD,3RD FLOOR, CHICAGO PLAZA,RAJAJI ROAD, KOCHI-682035.

¶15

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

R.P.177 OF 2020

ORDER

Dated : 2^nd March, 2020

¶20

1.This petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment of this Court, dated 29.8.2019, in W.P. (C).22312 of 2019, not because there is any error on the face of it, but because the petitioner has not been able to pay the amounts due to the respondent Bank as per the instalments fixed in the judgment.

¶21

2.Sri.Varghese C.Kuriakose, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client has been making every effort to pay off the amounts to the Bank, but that on account of severe impecuniousness, he has been incapacitated from doing so. He submits that his client is willing to pay Rs.10,00,000/- within a period of seven days and another Rs.5,00,000/- on or before 31.3.2020. He prays that the Bank be directed to accept these payments and to allow his client another ten months time to pay off the balance.

¶22

R.P.177 OF 2020

¶23

¶24

3.In response, Sri.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent Bank, submits that though they are not legally obligated to accede to any of the afore requests, by way of pure indulgence, the Bank is agreeable to accept Rs.10,00,000/- if the petitioner pays it within one week from the date of this order and another Rs.5,00,000/- if paid on or before 31.3.2020. Sri.Sunil Kumar, the learned counsel, further submits that the overdues in the account, as on 18.2.2020, is Rs.56,77,000/- and that the balance of it will have to be cleared of by the petitioner in not more than eight equal monthly instalments commencing from 20.4.2020.

¶25

4.In the afore circumstances and taking note of the submissions made on behalf of the respondent Bank, I allow this Review Petition to the extent of modifying the schedule of payment as ordered in paragraph 9 of the judgment; thus allowing the petitioner to pay Rs.10,00,000/-, out of the total

¶26

R.P.177 OF 2020

¶27

¶28

outstanding in the loan account, within seven days from the date of this order and a further sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, on or before 31.3.2020. If the afore payments are made by the petitioner within the time granted herein, then he will be entitled to pay the balance of the overdues, along with all applicable charges and interest, in eight equal monthly instalments commencing from 20.4.2020.

¶29

5.In all other respects, including the default clauses and directions, the original judgment will remain in tact.

¶30

6.This Review Petition is thus ordered.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN Judge

¶33

Mrcs/2.3.

Beena Musthafa v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beena Musthafa v. Union of India

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

Mor Gregorios Kuriakose, Vs Chandy Kuriakose

Raju V.P. Vs P.K.Sudheer Babu, IAS

M/S. United India Insurance Company Ltd, Vs Penkunju

Xavier Vs Mercy

Dr.Babu Oommen Thomas Vs P.M.Thomas

Xavier Vs Mary