Ahammed Koya P.M vs Panangad Service Co-Operative ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15168 Ker

W.P(C).14397/2021
                                       1


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
       TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 29TH ASHADHA, 1943
                            WP(C) NO. 14397 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

             AHAMMED KOYA P.M., AGED 52 YEARS
             S/o.MOIDEEN, VELLACHALPOYIL HOUSE, VATTOLI BAZAR,
             KOZHIKODE-673507

             SAINABA A P, W/O.AHAMMED KOYA P M, VELLACHALPOYIL
             HOUSE, VATTOLI BAZAR, KOZHIKODE-673507

             BY ADVS.
             E.C.AHAMED FAZIL
             M.P.SHAMEEM AHAMED



RESPONDENT/S:

             PANANGAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
             PANANGAD, HEAD OFFICE, BALUSSERY MUKK, POST BOX NO.5,
             BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673612, REPRESENTED BY ITS
             SECRETARY

             THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
             DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001


OTHER PRESENT:

             SR.GP K.P HARISH




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(C).14397/2021
                                            2




                                    JUDGMENT

Petitioner along with his wife have availed two loans from the first

respondent Service Co-operative Bank evidenced by Exts.P3 and P3(a).

The loan was defaulted. Accordingly, Exts.P3 and P3(a) notices were

issued calling upon the petitioners to pay the entire amount. According to

the petitioners, due to financial difficulty and loss in business, petitioners

could not repay the amount as agreed. However, petitioners are agreeble

to avail the benefit of OTS by paying the entire amount. Petitioner has

submitted Ext.P4 representation seeking the benefit of one time

settlement scheme. He has expressed his intention so in Ext.P4

representation.

2. Having regard to the limited relief sought by the petitioners, I

am inclined to direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P4

representation as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of

one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the

scheme is in force, that can be extended to the petitioners. Coercive

steps pursuant to Exts.P3 and P3(a) will stand deferred for one month.

Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE Sbna/