Disposed

Sudev T.K v. the Branch Manager

Kerala HC12 Oct 2021WP(C)/21573/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by a borrower seeking expeditious consideration of his representation to the bank regarding loan default and interest reduction, directing the bank to respond within one month without addressing the merits.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of the writ petition without expressing opinion on merits; directions to the Bank to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within one month.

Sudev T.K Vs the Branch Manager — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 20TH ASWINA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 21573 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUDEV T.K AGED 50 YEARS S/O. LATE KUTTAN, THERIL HOUSE, MULLAKKARA P.O., MANNUTHI , TRICHUR

¶8

BY ADVS. P.V.ANILKUMAR D.SARITHA KEERTHI PRIYA A.

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE BRANCH MANAGER, TRICHUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, MANNUTHI BRANCH, TRICHUR-680 651

¶11

BY SRI.BIMAL K. NATH, SR. GOVT. PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶14

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W. P. (C) No.21573 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 12^th day of October, 2021

¶15

J U D G M E N T

¶16

The petitioner avails a house loan from the

¶17

respondent Bank. Repayment of the loan was defaulted.

¶18

Thereupon, the Bank has initiated steps for recovery of loan. Seeking reduction of interest and grant of time,

¶19

the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation before

¶20

the first respondent. All that the petitioner seeks for

¶21

is an expeditious consideration of Ext.P3.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶23

the learned Standing Counsel for the Bank.

¶24

Without expressing anything on the merits, the

¶25

writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents

¶26

to consider Ext.P3 and pass appropriate orders within a

¶27

W. P. (C) No.21573 of 2021

¶28

-: 2 :-

¶29

period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN

JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21573/2021

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

Exhibit P1	TRUE PETIT	COPY IONER	OF THE DISEASE DETAILS OF THE
Exhibit P2	TRUE THE R	COPY ESPOND	OF THE NOTICE DATED 2.9.2021 FROM ENT BANK
Exhibit P3	TRUE 29.09 BEFOR	COPY .2021, E THE	OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4	TRUE 06.08 OLARI	COPY .2020 , THRI	OF THE TREATMENT DETAILS DATED ISSUED FROM MOTHER HOSPITAL , SSUR

Sudev T.K v. the Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudev T.K v. the Branch Manager

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

E.T.Abdul Jabbar Vs the Joint Registrar of Co. Operative Societies (G)

Muhammed Rasheed Vs Muhammed Rafi

Sivasankar G., Vs the State of Kerala

Isha Baby Vs the Union of India

Hotel Meriya Vs Excise Commissioner

R. Jayachandran Vs the Joint Regional Transport Officer