Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

Renuka Devi vs The Secretary

Author: K. Vinod Chandran

Bench: K.Vinod Chandran

       

  

   

 
 
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

            TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/27TH KARTHIKA, 1936

                                    WP(C).No. 11347 of 2013 (P)
                                    ---------------------------------------

PETITIONER:
-------------------

           RENUKA DEVI,
           AGED 68 YEARS
           CHITTUVILAKAM,
           SOUHRUDA NAGAR,
           KARIKUZHI,
           MAYYANAD.P.O.,
           PIN -- 691 303.

            BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAMESH BABU (SR.)
                          SRI.K.P.KAMALAKARA BABU
                          SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

        1. THE SECRETARY
            THE MAYYANAD REGIONAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. 94,
            MAYYANAD P.O.,
            KOLLAM, KERALA,
            PIN - 691 303.

        2. THE SALES OFFICER
            MAYYANAD RC BANK GROUP,
            KOLLAM,
            PIN - 691 303.

            R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.J. MICHEL


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
            18-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 11347 of 2013 (P)
---------------------------------------

                                           APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-------------------------------------

EXHIBIT P1:          TRUE COY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-4-13

EXHIBIT P2:          TRUE CPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20-12-12

EXHIBIT P3:          TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAN NOTICE DATED 21-1-13

EXHIBIT P4:          TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19-3-13

EXHIBIT P5:          TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25-3-13.


RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
---------------------------------------




                                           /TRUE COPY/




                                           P.A. TO JUDGE




AK



                 K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
              =====================
               W.P.(C) No.11347 of 2013 - P
             ======================
        Dated this the 18th day of November, 2014

                      J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, a defaulter in repaying the loan availed of from the 1st respondent is before this Court challenging the recovery proceedings initiated against him. The liability and the default is admitted and the only contention is against failure to intimate quantification. Considering the facts of the case and the alleged impecunious circumstances of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms:-

(i) The petitioners shall produce a certified copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent within two weeks of receipt of the same.
(ii) The 1st respondent shall quantify the amounts due under the various transactions of the petitioner and inform the petitioner in writing the amounts due as on 30.11.2014.
(iii) The 1st respondent shall grant fifteen monthly instalments for the payment of the balance dues, starting W.P.(C) No.11347 of 2013 - P 2 from 18.12.2014 and followed up on 18th of each succeeding month.
(iv) Recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance on condition that the remittances as per this order are made without any default.
(v) On the petitioner making two consecutive defaults, the recovery steps initiated shall revive and continue.
(vi) On the satisfaction of the dues as per the statement, the Bank shall give a statement of the future interest from 30.112014 and the same shall be settled as the 16th instalment.
(vii) On the petitioner satisfying the entire arrears, the recovery proceedings shall be unenforceable.

Writ Petition is disposed of as above, making it clear that the respondent will be free to proceed with the recovery if the above conditions are not complied with.

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB