Baby John vs Union Bank Of India
2024 Latest Caselaw 5637 Ker

Kerala High Court

Baby John vs Union Bank Of India on 16 February, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
          Friday, the 16th day of February 2024 / 27th Magha, 1945

                  IA.NO.1/2024 IN OP (DRT) NO. 18 OF 2024

APPLICANTS/PETITIONERS:

  1. BABY JOHN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O JAIN, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KALLAYAM
     P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695043.
  2. MERCY, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O.BABY JOHN, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KALLAYAM
     P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695043.
  3. STANLEY JOSEN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.NESAN, CHARIS VILLA, KALLAYAM
     P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695043.

RESPONDENT:

     UNION BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
     PEROORKKADA BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695005.


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to extend the time
limit for remitting the fine amount on the basis of the judgment of this
Hon'ble Court dated 15/01/2024 by two more months up to 31/03/2024, in the
interest 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 SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN, Advocate for the petitioners, the court passed
the following:
                          N. NAGARESH, J.
                --------------------------------------------
                           I.A.No.1 of 2024
                                     in
                     OP(DRT) No. 18 of 2024
             -------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 16th day of February, 2024


                               ORDER

**************

By judgment dated 15.01.2024 in OP(DRT) No.18 of

2024, this Court enlarged time for repayment of second

instalment till 31.01.2024. Enlargment was granted by this

Court to the time allotted to the petitioner by the Debts

Recovery Tribunal. The petitioner could not pay the amount

as directed by the Tribunal even on 31.01.2024.

In the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant further

time.

I.A is therefore dismissed.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams