R.Rajkumar v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/24TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1185 of 2015 (W) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------- R.RAJKUMAR AGED 42 YEARS S/O. RAGHAVAN, VILAYIL VEEDU, THEKKECHERY P.O. KANJAVEILI, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.S.S.RAJESH RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE KERALA DEBT RELIEF COMMISSION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE QUILON CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD.
MAIN BRANCH, YMCA ROAD, KOLLAM-1 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
4. THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER THE QUILON CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., MAIN BRANCH YMCA ROAD, KOLLAM-1.
5. SRI.S.RENJITH KUMAR THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER KOLLAM IN CONNECTION WITH CMP NO.5789/2011 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM. R3, 4 BY ADV. SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.) R3, 4 BY ADV. SMT.D.P.RENU R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 1185 of 2015 (W) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.22.1.2009 BY THE PETITIONER. P2 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.1804/09 DTD.26.3.2010. P3 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.382487/09/KL DTD.23.9.2011. P4 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SRI.NAKULAN. P5 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD.5.1.2015 FROM THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. P6 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT WITHOUT ANNEXURES RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE sou.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.1185 OF 2015 (W) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of February, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, who is an agriculturist by profession, approached this Court aggrieved by the action taken by the respondent bank to recover the loan amounts. When the matter came up on 13.1.2015, it was posted to 15.1.2015 at the request of the petitioner. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 28.1.2015 again at the request of the petitioner. Still later, when the matter was posted to 4.2.2015, it was adjourned to 11.2.2015 at the request of the petitioner. On 11.2.2015, there was no representation for the petitioner, and, accordingly, the matter was posted to today as a last chance. Even today when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Under such circumstances, I do not see any reason to entertain this writ petition by exercising the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp