Bathisha vs The Authorised Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 14643 Ker

Kerala High Court

Bathisha vs The Authorised Officer on 31 May, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
        FRIDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1946
                        WP(C) NO. 31198 OF 2023
PETITIONER

             BATHISHA
             AGED 40 YEARS
             S/O IBRAHIM, ATTAGOLI HOUSE, PO KAYYAR, UPPALA,
             KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671322
             BY ADV DEEPAK RAJ


RESPONDENTS:

    1        THE AUTHORISED OFFICER
             THE MANJESWARAM PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND
             RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, UPPALA P.O., KASARAGOD
             DISTRICT, PIN - 671322
    2        THE MANJESWARAM PRIVAMAR COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND
             RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THE MANJESWARAM PRIVAMAR
             COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,
             UPPALA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671322
    3        STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COOPERATION,
             ROOM O. 397, 1ST FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
             SMT.C.S.SHEEJA - SR GP
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 31198 OF 2023              2

                              JUDGMENT

The limited plea of the petitioner is that the respondent - Bank be

directed to allow him to pay off the overdue amount in the loan account

in 24 equal monthly installments so as to have it regularised. He

submitted that he is constrained to make this request because of the

financial constraints he is facing and hence being unable to make

payment in lump sum.

2. The endorsements on the files of this case indicate that the

petitioner has already taken out notice to the respondents 1 and 2 by

speed post.

3. It is rather distressing that the respondents 1 and 2 have still

refused to appear before this Court. However, this cannot be a reason

for this Court to refrain from passing appropriate orders.

In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, leaving

liberty to the petitioner to approach the Bank with an appropriate

representation seeking any relief/claim that he may make; and if this is

done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment, the same shall be considered by the competent Authority

of the said Bank, after affording him an opportunity of being heard, thus

culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon

without any avoidable delay thereafter.

Needless to say, until such time as the afore is done and the

resultant order communicated to the petitioner, the interim order

granted by this Court on 25.09.2023 will continue to be in operation.

I, however, clarify that I have not entered into the merits of any of

the claims of the petitioner and that they are left to be decided by the

respondent - Bank appropriately.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/5.6

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31198/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTIONS 19 TO 25 AS PER RULE 8 OF THE KERALA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK ACT 1984 DATED 09.08.2023 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.08.2023 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR/VALUATION OFFICER OF THE MANJESWARAM PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK