The Branch Manager vs Akhil P.V
2023 Latest Caselaw 5419 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
         THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1945
                                 RP NO. 496 OF 2023
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 12950/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER:

     1         THE BRANCH MANAGER,AGED 50 YEARS
               SBI RASMEC KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671531

     2         THE BRANCH MANAGER,AGED 45 YEARS,STATE BANK OF INDIA,
               KANHANGAD BRANCH, KASARAGOD., PIN - 671531

               BY ADVS.
               BINDUMOL JOSEPH
               BEENA JOSEPH
               RIYAS M.B.


RESPONDENTS:

     1         AKHIL P.V, AED 27 YEARS S/O RAVEENDRAN, "GURUZOOL HOUSE", NEAR
               KARINDALAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KARINTHALAM VILLAGE,
               KARINTHALAM PO, VELLARIKUNDU TALUK KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN -
               671314

     2         THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTORATE, KASARAGOD,, PIN - 671123

     3         THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,VELLARIKUND TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,,
               PIN - 671533

     4         THE VILLAGE OFFICER,KARINTHALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, VELLARIKUNDU
               TALUK, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671314

               BY ADV VIMAL VIJAY


OTHER PRESENT:

               GP - RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE


     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.04.2023, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.P.No.496 of 2023                       2


                     VIJU ABRAHAM,J
                -----------------------
                   R.P.No.496 of 2023
             -----------------------------
         Dated this the 27th day of April, 2023

                                    ORDER

The above review petition is filed seeking

review of the judgment dated 18.4.2023 in WP(C)

No.12950 of 2023, wherein a direction was issued to

the bank to permit the repayment of the entire

overdue amount in instalments and on payment of the

same to regularize the loan account of the

petitioner. It is essentially aggrieved by the

said direction to regularize the loan account that

the present review petition has been filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the review

petitioner would submit that the aforesaid amount

of Rs.8,94,744/- as on 11.4.2023 is the total

amount due and not the overdue amount and the bank

has agreed to accept the total dues of

Rs.8,94,744/- along with future interest, costs and

expenses in instalments and that they have not

agreed for regularization of the account and

further that the loan period was for 13 years and

the same will expire in the year 2024. The said

submission of the learned counsel appearing for the

review petitioner is not refuted by the learned

counsel appearing for the writ petitioner.

Therefore, the review petition is disposed of

as follows: It is clarified that the amount of

Rs.8,94,744/- is not the overdue amount, but the

total outstanding. Therefore, there need not be

any regularization of the loan account of the

petitioner. The total amount of Rs.8,94,744/-

directed to be paid along with the bank charges is

the entire outstanding amount and the direction to

the bank to regularize the loan account is hereby

recalled.

With the above said direction, the review

petition is disposed of.

sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE pm