Najumunneesa vs The Authorised Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 10364 Ker

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
           Friday, the 7th day of October 2022 / 15th Aswina, 1944
                   IA.NO.1/2022 IN WP(C) NO. 20105 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:

  1. NAJUMUNNEESA, AGED 32 YEARS W/O. JAFFER SADIQ1 B., PAJJYAMMA HOUSE,
     MAIRE, KASARAGODE-671552.
  2. JAFFER SADIQ B., PAJJYAMMA HOUSE, MAIRE, KASARAGODE-671552.

RESPONDENTS:

  1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, CTM TOWERS, OPP. P-T QUARTERS,
     KASARGODE-671123.
  2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, CANARA BANK, CTM TOWERS, OPP. P-T QUARTERS,
     KASARGODE-671123.

     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to F or the reasons
stated in the accompanying affidavit and that may be urged at the time of
hearing, it is humbly prayed that the petitioners may be granted some more time
and installments to pay off the debt ordered by this Hon'ble Court, to meet the
ends of Justice.
     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments
of M/S.SREEKALA KRISHNADAS, C.VIVEK, ASHLY JAMES, APARNA NAIR & RENJINI
RAMESHAN, Advocates for the petitioners, the court passed the following:
                               GOPINATH P., J
                          -------------------------------
                                I.A No.1 of 2022
                                        in
                          W.P(C) No.20105 of 2022
                      ---------------------------------------
                    Dated this the 7th day of October, 2022

                                  ORDER

Petitioner seeks extension of time to comply with the directions

contained in the judgment dated 27.6.2022. It is pointed out by the learned

counsel appearing for the respondent bank that no amount has been paid as

directed by this Court and as on date, the default of payment in terms of the

judgment itself comes to nearly Rs.11 lakhs. It is submitted that if the amount

payable in terms of the judgment for the month of October is also factored, the

amount payable by the petitioner as on date will be more than Rs.14 lakhs.

Prima facie, I am of the opinion that unless the petitioner shows bona fides, the

question of extension of time cannot be considered.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will

attempt to remit a substantial amount on or before 31.10.2022.

3. The taking of physical possession of the secured asset shall stand

deferred till 02.11.2022 on condition that the petitioner remits a sum of

Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs fifty thousand only) before 5 pm on

10.10.2022 and a further sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) on or

before 31.10.2022.

Post on 02.11.2022.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE okb/7.10.22