Kerala High Court
Jovamma Antony vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank ... on 9 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.6103 OF 2021(K)
PETITIONERS:
1 JOVAMMA ANTONY
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O.ANTONY, EDATHANIYIL HOUSE, PADUPPU,
SHANKARAMPADY, CHENGALA VIA, MANIMOOLA POST,
KASARGODU-671 541.
2 ANTONY THOMAS,
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O.THOMAS, EDATHANIYIL HOUSE, PADUPPU,
SHANKARAMPADY, CHENGALA VIA, MANIMOOLA POST,
KASARGODU-671 541.
BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.(KERALA BANK)
BANDADUKKA BRANCH, POST SHANKARAMPADYM PADUPPU,
KASARGODU-671 541, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
SARFAESI ACT, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
(KERALA BANK), HEAD OFFICE, KASARGODU-671 121.
3 THE GENERAL MANAGER,
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (KERALA BANK),
HEAD OFFICE, PB NO.48, NAYAKS ROAD, KASARGODU P.O.,
PIN-671 121.
OTHER PRESENT:
SC- SRI. M.SASINDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.6103 OF 2021(K)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of March 2021
By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following
reliefs.
(A) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
order or direction commanding the respondents to consider and
pass orders of Ext.P2 within a time fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
(B) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
order or direction restraining the respondents from taking
coercive steps against the petitioners' and their property in
connection with the loan transactions.
(C) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
order or direction commanding the respondents to pay off the
arrears of the EMI equally in 30 instalments along with the next
EMI of the loan as and when due.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners had submitted representation at Ext.P2 to the respondents
which is not yet decided. It is further argued that the petitioners have
taken three loans and has repaid an amount of Rs.7 lakhs till now.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, till the
representation is decided by the respondents, no coercive action
should be initiated against the petitioners for recovery of the amount
of loan.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that
representation at Ext.P2 is not yet received by the respondents and if
the same is submitted, the respondents shall take necessary decision
WP(C).No.6103 OF 2021(K)
on the said representation immediately.
4. So far as the prayer for restraining the respondents from
taking coercive action against the petitioners and their property in
connection with the loan transaction is concerned, this Court has no
jurisdiction to entertain such prayer in the light of judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Authorized Officer, State Bank
of Travancore and another vs. Mathew K.C ((2018) 3 Supreme
Court Cases 85)(DB).
5. As the learned counsel for respondents have submitted that
the representation regarding repayment of overdue amount of loan at
Ext.P2 is not received, the writ petition is disposed of with the
following directions:
The petitioners to furnish the copies of representation at Ext.P2
to the respondents within a period of one week from today. On receipt
of copies of representation at Ext.P2, the respondents shall take a
decision thereon within a further period of one week. The petition is
accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
A.M.BADAR
Nsd
//true copy//
JUDGE
PA to Judge
WP(C).No.6103 OF 2021(K)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02.02.2019
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONERS WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONERS TO THE RESPONDENTS DATED
01.03.2021.
