Muhammed Jashid Karipody vs Authorised Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 1990 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
           Friday, the 3rd day of February 2023 / 14th Magha, 1944
                  IA.NO.1/2022 IN WP(C) NO. 1691 OF 2022(J)
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

     MUHAMMED JASHID KARIPODY, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL JALEEL KARIPODI,
     KARIPODI VILLA, KOTTIKULAM, BAKERL P.O., KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671
     318

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

  1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., SIB HOUSE, T.B ROAD,
     MISSION QUARTERS, THRISSUR-680 001.
  2. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD., YEMPEES COMPLEX, MAIN ROAD, PALAKUNNU, BEKAL
     P.O. KASARGOD-671 318, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER

     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to enlarge the time to
comply with the judgment of this Honourable Court dated 18-01-2022
granting time till 30-04-2023 in the interest of justice.
     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and this Court's judgment
dated 18-01-2022 and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS,
Advocate for the petitioner in IA/WP(C) and of SRI.SUNIL SHANKAR, STANDING
COUNSEL for respondents in IA/WP(C), the court passed the following:




    P.T.O.
                      MOHAMMED NIAS C.P, J.
                   ------------------------------------
                             I.A.1 of 2022
                                    in
                        W.P.(C).1691 of 2022
               -------------------------------------------
                     Dated : 3rd February, 2023

                               ORDER

By judgment dated 18.1.2022, petitioner was directed to

remit the overdue amounts in six equal monthly instalments

commencing from 10th February, 2022. There is a further

direction to pay the equated monthly instalments over and above

the instalments directed above. Petitioner submits that he has

paid Rs.12,27,093/- and there has been default in making

payments in terms of the judgment and seeks time till 30.4.2023

to comply with the terms of the judgment in full.

2. The learned counsel for the Bank opposes the

extension.

However, taking into account the fact that the petitioner

has made payments of Rs.12,27,093/- and that the petitioner

undertakes to comply with the terms of the judgment in full

before 30.4.2023, as a last chance and as a measure of

indulgence, the application will stand allowed. No further WP(C).1691/2022

extension will be given to the petitioner under any circumstances.

In case of violation of this order by the petitioner, the Bank will be

free to proceed for recovery of the amounts due from the stage at

which the proceedings were kept in abeyance.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE

Mrcs

03-02-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar