Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3699 Ker
Judgement Date : 29 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 11064 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:
1 MURUGAN CC
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, THEVAKKAL HOUSE, CHULLIYAR
MEDU, MUTHALAMADA POST, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678507
2 HARIKUMAR C.L.
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, THEVAKKAL HOUSE, CHULLIYAR
MEDU, MUTHALAMADA POST, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678507
3 PRAMEELA MURUGAN
AGED 41 YEARS
W/O MURUGAN, THEVAKKAL HOUSE, CHULLIYAR MEDU,
MUTHALAMADA POST, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678507
BY ADVS.
SAJAN VARGHEESE K.
LIJU. M.P
JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY
RESPONDENTS:
1 RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
MAIN BUILDING, PO BOX 901, SHAHID BHAGAT SINGH ROAD,
MUMBAI, REP. BY THE GOVERNOR, PIN - 400001
2 THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD
PERUMATTY BRANCH, WARD NO.14, TKD BUILDING, NANNIYODU
PO, PERUMATTY, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678534
R2 - SRI.SUNIL SHANKER,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.11064 of 2023
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 29th day of March, 2023
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking the
following reliefs:
i. Call for the records relating to Exhibits P1;
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ of order or direction, directing the respondent No.2 to extend the period mentioned in Ext.P1 to pay the balance amount of Rs.38,10,000/-, for a reasonable period viz three months.
2. The 1st petitioner availed a loan from the South Indian
Bank Limited, Perumatty Branch, Palakkad - the 2 nd respondent.
According to the petitioners, due to unforeseen circumstances the
loan could not be repaid as expected. Anyhow at the instance of
the petitioner the OTS scheme was applied and the petitioner was
directed to pay an amount of Rs.40,10,000/- on or before
31.03.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that,
petitioner paid 2,00,000/- out of the said amount. It is also
submitted that two months more time is required to pay the entire
balance under the OTS scheme.
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent bank
submitted that, the OTS granted to the petitioner cannot be
extended and has brought to my notice the judgment of the apex W.P.(C) No.11064 of 2023
Court in State Bank of India Vs. Aravindra Electronics Pvt.Ltd
[MANU/SC/1429/2022] wherein apex Court has laid down the
law that the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India shall not extend the period of OTS. Any how being convinced
with the situation, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation
before the bank seeking appropriate reliefs.
In that view of he matter, after hearing learned counsel for
the petitioners, Sri.Laiju M.P. and learned Standing Counsel for the
bank Sri.Sunil Sankar; the writ petition is disposed of leaving open
the liberty of the petitioner to file suitable representation before
the bank within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment. If any such representation is received by the bank, I
have no reason to think that the bank will not consider the same
in accordance with law and grant sufficient time to the petitioner to
pay off the outstanding amounts either under any OTS scheme
available or otherwise.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE AP W.P.(C) No.11064 of 2023
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11064/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 .
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 13.06.22 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND ONE NOUSHAD AND SUBRAHMANIAN .
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!