Kerala High Court
Murali K. K vs The Authorised Officer, Axis Bank ... on 9 November, 2021
WP(C) No.24570/2021 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Tuesday, the 9th day of November 2021 / 18th Karthika, 1943
WP(C) NO. 24570 OF 2021(U)
PETITIONERS:
1. MURALI K. K., AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, KAKKATTHAZHAKUNI (H),
VILLYAPPALLI, VADAKARA, MEMUNDA P. O., KOZHIKKODE, PIN - 673 104.
2. SHIJINA, AGED 39 YEARS, W/O. MURALI K. K., KAKKATTHAZHAKUNI (H),
VILLYAPPALLI, VADAKARA, MEMUNDA P. O., KOZHIKKODE, PIN - 673 104.
3. KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. KELAPPAN, KAKKATTHAZHAKUNI (H),
VILLYAPPALLI, VADAKARA, MEMUNDA P. O., KOZHIKKODE, PIN - 673 104.
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, AXIS BANK LIMITED, RETAIL ASSET CENTER, 2ND
FLOOR, GLOBAL TOWER, PARAYANCHERY, CALICUT, PIN - 673 016.
2. AXIS BANK LIMITED, EDAKKAD TOWER, GROUND FLOOR, REPRESENTED BY THE
MANAGER, VADAKARA BRANCH, KOZHIKKODE, PIN - 673 101.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to pass an interim order staying all further proceedings against
the petitioners in pursuant to Exhibit P1, under the Securitisation Act
until disposal of Writ Petition.
This petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and
the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of
M/S.K.REEHA KHADER & P.K.SUBHASH, Advocates for the petitioners and of
SRI.N.K.SAJU,Advocate for the respondents(By order), the court passed the
following:
WP(C) No.24570/2021 2/4
WP(C) No.24570 of 2021
1
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
----------------------------------------
WP(C) No.24570 of 2021
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of November, 2021
ORDER
Adv. N.A.Saju, the learned Counsel for the respondents upon
instructions, submitted that petitioners have not complied with the
terms of the judgment dated 04.03.2020 in W.P(C)No.33390/2019.
It was also pointed out that petitioners have not even come forward
with any proposal for settlement under any scheme and therefore, at
the moment the respondents are not inclined to show any leniency
in the grant of instalment. However, if the petitioners submit a
proposal, respondents have offered to consider the same.
2. In view of the above submission, petitioners are directed
to file a proposal for settlement of the entire liability of the
petitioners. If an application for settlement is proposed by the
petitioners within a period of 10 days from today, the respondents
shall consider and pass appropriate orders on the same, within a
period of 15 days thereafter.
Till the respondents take a decision on the proposed
application, petitioners shall not be physically dispossessed if the
WP(C) No.24570/2021 3/4
WP(C)No.24570 of 2021
petitioners file the proposal for settlement as directed. It is also
clarified this Court has only restrained physical dispossession of the
petitioners and the respondents shall not be restrained from issuing
notice for dispossession.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJ/09.11.2021
09-11-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
WP(C) No.24570/2021 4/4
Exhibit P1 NOTICE BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 12.11.2019.
