Kerala High Court
Pankajakshan vs State Of Kerala on 13 March, 2012
Author: Antony Dominic
Bench: Antony Dominic
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/2ND ASWINA 1934
WP(C).No. 8812 of 2012 (B)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------
1. PANKAJAKSHAN,AGED 56 YEARS,
S/O.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI,SOBHA NIVAS,KALPETTA.
2. P.SHOBHA,, AGED 46 YEARS,
W/O.PANJAKSHAN,SOBHA NIVAS,KALPETTA.
BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. CHIEF MANAGER,
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,KALPETTA BRANCH,
WAYANAD DISTRICT - 673 121.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMBIL
R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC, SBT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 24-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
WPC.NO.8812/2012 B
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PASS BOOK ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION SHOWING THE MONTHLY FEE DETAILS
OF PREJITH.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 13.3.2012 ISSUED BY
THE IST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
----------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.8812 of 2012
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of September, 2012
JUDGMENT
The writ petition has been filed challenging recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioners, who are parents of a student, who availed of an educational loan of Rs.3,40,000/- from the respondent bank. In the writ petition, they contended that in view of the judgment in Vasantha Kumari v. State Bank of Travancore(2012(1) KLT 755), the petitioners could not have been made liable for the loan. On this basis, the recovery initiated is sought to be challenged.
On behalf of the respondent bank, it is now pointed out that the judgment relied on by the petitioners has been set aside by a Division Bench in its judgment in Writ Appeal No.974 of 2012. Therefore, the issue raised by the petitioners is fully covered against them in view of the Division Bench judgment. For that reason, the writ petition is dismissed.
However, the judgment will not prevent the petitioners from approaching the bank and getting the liability settled.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ln