Manju P.T vs The Authorised Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 16525 Ker

Kerala High Court

Manju P.T vs The Authorised Officer on 11 June, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
          Tuesday, the 11th day of June 2024 / 21st Jyaishta, 1946
                   IA.NO.2/2024 IN WP(C) NO. 8908 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

     MANJU P.T., AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. THANKACHAN, KALLASSERIL,PUTHENTHURA
     P.O, NEENDAKARA, KOLLAM, PIN-691588

RESPONDENTS:

  1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, RACPC(10212),SECOND
     FLOOR, RAVI'S ARCADE, NEAR IRON BRIDGE, KOLLAM, PIN-691013
  2. BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA,CHAVARA BRANCH, KOLLAM,
     PIN-691583

     Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to extend the time for
effecting payment of overdue amount by a period of 1 month and on such
payment the possession of the residential building may be directed to be
restored, as per the judgment, in the interest of justice.
     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof,this court's Final order dated
19.03.2024 and upon hearing the arguments of SHRI. L.RAJESH NARAYAN,
Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S. ARUN THOMAS, JOE S. ADHIKARAM &
LEAH RACHEL NINAN, Advocates for R1, the court passed the following:
                            N. NAGARESH, J.
                          ----------------------------
                             I.A No.2 of 2024
                                       in
                      W.P. (C) No. 8908 of 2024
               --------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 11th day of June, 2024

                                ORDER

This is an application to enlarge the time granted

by this Court in judgment dated 19.03.2024 in

W.P.(C) No.8908 of 2024.

2. The petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the IA.

IA is therefore dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE AMR