Kerala High Court
Aneesh Kp vs Canara Bank on 7 May, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1943
WA.No.714 OF 2021
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN WPC 7894/2021:
ANEESH KP
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. BALAN, THUNDIPARAMBATH, ERAMALA (PO),
KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN-673 501
BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC 7894/2021:
1 CANARA BANK
ORKATTERY BRANCH, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE , PIN-673
002, REPRESENTED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
2 BRANCH MANAGER,
CANARA BANK, ORKATTERY BRANCH,
VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 002
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR - SC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.714/2021
-:2:-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of May 2021
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The appellant assails the judgment of this Court in WP(C)
No.7894/2021.
2. From the judgment in question, we find that the
learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition, since
the appellant/petitioner did not accede to the suggestion made
by the Bank for paying off the total overdues in 10 instalments.
3. However, when this matter was considered by this
court on 4/5/2021, the learned counsel for the Bank-
Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, fairly submitted that he will obtain
instructions from his client as to whether a better offer can be
given to the appellant.
4. Today, the learned standing counsel for the Bank
submitted that, if the appellant pays an amount of `3½ lakhs
within one month, he can be allowed to pay off the balance of the
total outstanding in the loan account in 15 instalments. He
WA No.714/2021
added that, the total outstanding in the loan account is over
`22.6 lakhs; while the overdues is nearly `9.4 lakhs.
5. When considering this appeal, we are fully aware that
on account of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Union
Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon and Others [(2010) 8 SCC
110] and Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and
Another v. Mathew K.C. (2018 (1) KLT 784), our jurisdiction in
this matter is extremely restricted. As has been settled by the
Supreme Court, we can only give relief to the appellant in the
manner as is conceded by the Bank.
6. Since Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar submits that the Bank
can allow the appellant the liberty of paying off the total
overdues in 15 instalments, provided he pays an amount of `3 ½
lakhs in one month, we have no other option, but to accept the
same.
7. Sri.C.R.Sivakumar, learned counsel for the appellant
also acceded to the aforesaid suggestion and prayed that the
appeal be ordered on such terms.
8. In the above circumstances, we allow this appeal, not
because there is any error in the judgment assailed before us,
but, on account of the consensus between the parties as afore
WA No.714/2021
and vacate the directions of the learned Single Judge, thus
enabling the appellant/petitioner to pay off the total overdues in
the manner below.
9. Resultantly, the appellant is directed to pay an amount
of `3.5 lakhs on or before 7/6/2021; in which event, he will be
allowed to pay off the balance of the total outstanding, along with
all applicable charges and interest, in 15 equal monthly
instalments, commencing from 12th of July, 2021.
10. It is needless to say that our directions afore are
peremptory in its nature, and that, if the appellant refuses or fails
to comply with any of them, the Bank will be at full liberty to
initiate all legal action as are available to them, including under
the SARFAESI Act, for recovery from the stage at which it is
available today.
This writ appeal is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
Rp DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
