Renjeev.V.R vs South Indian Bank Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 9477 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

     MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.5763 OF 2021(U)


PETITIONER:

               RENJEEV.V.R
               AGED 39 YEARS
               S/O. VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, ALAKKODU SREENIVAS, CHINGOLI
               P.O. ALAPPUZHA 690 532.

               BY ADV. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.
               REGISTERED OFFICE, T.B. ROAD, MISSION QUARTERS,
               THRISSUR 680 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER.

      2        THE BRANCH MANAGER,
               SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,
               KARTHIKAPPALLI BRANCH, KARTHIKAPPALLI P.O. ALAPPUZHA
               690 516.

      3        CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
               ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED
               THROUGH ITS STANDING COUNSEL, HIGH CO RUT OF KERALA,
               ERNAKULAM 682 031.

               R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL SHANKER
               R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.K.ARUNDHATHI
               R3 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.5763 OF 2021(U)

                                     2

                               JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of March 2021

The petitioner debtor has preferred this petition for directing

respondents No. 1 and 2 to take expeditious decision on the request

for settlement and return of title documents made via representation

at Ext.P3.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the

request for one time settlement made by the petitioner is pending with

the respondents. It is argued that loan was not properly sanctioned

and the Manager has played a fowl play in the matter for which

criminal case is instituted against the Manager. It is further argued

that earlier, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner and thereafter,

two documents of title were returned to the petitioner. It is submitted

that the original application filed by the Bank for recovery of the

amount is pending.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents accepted the fact

that the representation of the petitioner, Ext.P3 for availing benefit of

one time settlement scheme is pending with the respondents and he

further submits that the said representation can be decided within four

days.

4. In this view of the matter, as the respondents are willing to WP(C).No.5763 OF 2021(U)

decide the representation at Ext.P3 within four days, the petition is

closed by directing the respondents to decide the representation at

Ext.P3 within four days from today, and then to intimate the result of

the representation to the petitioner forthwith.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR Nsd //true copy// JUDGE PA to Judge WP(C).No.5763 OF 2021(U)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 03.01.2018 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC NO. 38173/2017.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.02.2018 SUBMITTED REQUESTING FOR SETTLEMENT AS PER THE FACILITY OFFERED VIDE EXHIBIT P1 COUNTER ADAPTIVITY IN WPC NO. 38173/2017.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED ON 04.01.2021 BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 07.12.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE ARRAYED RESPECTIVELY AS DEFENDANTS 7 AND 8 I O.A. NO. 665/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ATTACHMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FILED AS I.A. 1088/2020 IN O.A. NO. 665/2020 IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, ERNAKULAM, BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BANK AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND HIS WIFE.