Kerala High Court
Saritha Sasidharan vs Lic Housing Finance Ltd on 18 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 29TH MAGHA,1942
RP.No.150 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21898/2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21898/2019(J) OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS:
1 SARITHA SASIDHARAN
AGED 48 YEARS
D/O.P.K.SASIDHARAN, FLAT NO.64, SHYAM MANOR, ARTECH
SAMRUDHI, THANBURANMUKKU, VANCHIYOOR P. O. AND
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 035.
2 PRINCE N. RAVI
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O.O.N.RAVEENDRAN, FLAT NO.64, SHYAM MANOR, ARTECH
SAMRUDHI, THANBURANMUKKU, VANCHIYOOR P.O. AND
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 035.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN
SHRI.PRAVEEN S.
SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
SRI.DIPU JAMES
SHRI.MATHEW K.T.
SHRI.GEORGE K.V.
RESPONDENTS:
1 LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD.,
131 MAKER TOWER 'F' PREMISES, 13TH FLOOR, CUFFE
PARADE, MUMBAI - 400 005, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMEN
AND MANGING DIRECTOR.
2 LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD.,
REP. BY ITS MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR, LEELA TOWER,
KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -
695 004.
3 THE AUTHORISED OFFICER AND CHIEF MANAGER
LIC HOUSING FINANCE LTD., 2ND FLOOR, LEELA TOWER,
KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM P. O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.
RP.No.150 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21898/2019
2
SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL-GP
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
RP.No.150 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21898/2019
3
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking
review of the judgment dated 13.08.2019 in
W.P(C)No.21898 of 2019, not because there is
any error apparent on its face, but because
the petitioners have not been able to pay the
overdues in the loan account in the manner
directed therein.
2. Shri.George Mathew, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners, submitted that
though his clients have complied with the
directions in the judgment implicitly, there
was default of one instalment and that
thereafter, on account of the COVID-19
pandemic restrictions, his clients have not
been able to pay the remaining EMIs. He,
therefore, prayed that the Bank be directed
to allow his clients to pay off the overdues
in another 8 or 10 instalments.
3. In response, Shri.R.S.Kalkura,
learned Standing Counsel for the respondent -
RP.No.150 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21898/2019
Bank, submitted that the assertions of the
petitioners as afore are not correct and that
there were several defaults in even complying
with the directions in the judgment. He then
added that the overdue, as on 18.2.2021 is
Rs.10,19,777/- and that if the petitioners
are willing to pay at least half of this
amount by the end of this financial year, the
Bank can allow them to pay the balance in not
more than 3 instalments.
Taking note of the afore submissions,
and since this Court can exercise any
jurisdiction in this matter only on the
consent of the Bank, I order this review
petition to the limited extent of modifying
the directions in the judgment, by permitting
the petitioners to pay an amount of Rs.5
lakhs on or before 29/03/2021; in which
event, the balance amount of the afore
mentioned overdue, along with all applicable
charges and interest, will be permitted to be
RP.No.150 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21898/2019
paid by them in 3 equal monthly instalments
commencing from 29.4.2021.
In all other respects the judgment will
remain unaltered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/18.2.2021
