Sreekumar Kannkuzhiyil ... vs The Axis Bank Limited

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
        TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
                          RP NO. 266 OF 2022
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 27952/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
                                KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITOINER:

            SREEKUMAR KANNKUZHIYIL SREEDHARAN
            AGED 47 YEARS
            S/O. SREEDHARAN, KANNANKUZHIYIL HOUSE, AKKIKKAVU,
            PERUMPILAVU P. O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 519,
            PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT NO.27, SUR, SULTHANATE OF
            OMAN, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, DR.
            U. K. ABHILASH, S/O. LATE U. K. BHASI, AGED 36 YEARS,
            VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, TANUR P. O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
            - 676 302.
            BY ADV BINOY VASUDEVAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE AXIS BANK LIMITED
            REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CIRCLE OFFICE,
            5TH FLOOR, CHICAGO PLAZA, RAJAJI ROAD, KOCHI - 682 035.
    2       THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
            THE AXIS BANK LIMITED, CIRCLE OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR,
            CHICAGO PLAZA, RAJAJI ROAD, KOCHI - 682 035.
OTHER PRESENT:

            SRI. T. K. RAJESH KUMAR FOR R


     THIS   REVIEW   PETITION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.P.NO. 266 of 2022
in
W.P.(C).NO. 27952 of 2021
                                         2


                     BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                -----------------------------------------
                         R.P.NO. 266 of 2022
                                    in
                     W.P.(C).NO. 27952 of 2021
                 ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 28th day of June, 2022


                             ORDER

This review petitioner in effect seeks for modifying the conditions directing repayment of the overdue amount in instalments. According to the petitioner, he has committed default of the instalment payments stipulated in the judgment for the months of April, May and June.

2. Though the learned counsel for the respondents vehemently objected to the variation or modification of the conditions in the judgment, I am satisfied that, taking note of the present circumstances, a lenient view has to be taken and the petitioner be granted time till 30/7/2022, to clear the entire defaulted instalments, as directed in the judgment. Ordered accordingly.

Needless to mention, all other conditions in the judgment shall continue to remain.

This review petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM 29/6/22