Ravindran Ashari vs Zonal Manager, Central Bank Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13024 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                        PRESENT
                        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
           THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                              WP(C) NO. 12356 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

                  RAVINDRAN ASHARI
                  AGED 52 YEARS
                  S/O SANKARAN ASARI,
                  ANEESH BHAVANAM
                  NELIVILA AZHIKATHU VEEDU, KARAKULAM,
                  NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM- 685541
                  BY ADV M.R.SARIN



RESPONDENT/S:

       1          ZONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA
                  ZONAL OFFICE, 48-49, MONDI ROAD,
                  EGMORE, CHENNAI-600008
       2          CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, PEROORKADA BRANCH,
                  REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
                  MADHAVA HEIGHTS, MAIN RD,
                  DEVAPALAN NAGAR,PEROORKADA,
                  THIRUVANANATHAPURAM- 695005
       3          THE BRANCH MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,
                  PEROORKADA BRANCH, PEROORKADA
                  THIRUVANANATHAPURAM- 695005
OTHER PRESENT:

                  SC V.SUNILKUMAR



THIS       WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
17.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 12356 OF 2021
                                         2




                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 16th day of June, 2021

The property of the petitioner mortgaged with the 2nd

respondent Bank as security for loans availed was brought to sale on

the repayment being defaulted. The property was sold in public

auction in the year 2012. Much later, the petitioner approached the

Bank with Exts.P1 and P2 representations, expressing willingness to

pay of the entire amount due to the bank and requested to set aside

the sale and return the property to his possession.

2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to pass orders

on Exts.P1 and P2 representations. Learned Standing Counsel for the

2nd respondent Bank submits that Exts.P1 and P2 representations

were considered and rejected by the bank and intimation in this

regard was sent to the petitioner on 2.1.2021.

In the above circumstances, nothing survives for consideration

and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

V.G ARUN JUDGE SJ