High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17763/2015disposed of

Ismail Faizal Abdul Samad v. The Chief Manager/Authorized Officer

2015-06-124 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/22ND JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17763 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- ISMAIL FAIZAL ABDUL SAMAD, S/O.FAIZAL ABDUL SAMAD, AGED 28, RESIDING AT 'SMILING' HOUSE, KOTTAYIL KOVILAKAM KARA, CHENNAMANGALAM.P.O., CHENNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 502.

BY ADVS.SRIP.S.SUJETH SMT.M.R.REENA RESPONDENT(S):

--------------------------

1. THE CHIEF MANAGER/AUTHORIZED OFFICER, INDIAN BANK, ALUVA BRANCH, KAP COMMERCIAL CENTRE, R S ROAD, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 513.

2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, INDIAN BANK, NORTH PARAVUR BRANCH, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 513.

BY SRI.S.EASWARAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

WP(C).No. 17763 of 2015 (U) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT. P1 :

TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE SALE OFFICER, DATED 10.4.2015.

EXT. P2 :

TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN TO THE BRANCH MANAGER, DATED 15.4.2015.

EXT. P3 :

TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT SHOWING THE TRANSACTION IN THE ABOVE LOAN ACCOUNT DATED 1.1.2014 TO 27.12.2014.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

******************************************************* W.P.(C) No.17763 of 2015 ******************************************************* Dated this the 12th day of June, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner approached this Court threatened by SARFAESI proceedings. The petitioner availed an overdraft facility. The period is over. The petitioner submits that the overdue amount is only Rs.2.5 lakhs and the unit is functioning. Therefore, the Bank may be directed to renew the overdraft facility after clearing the overdue amount.

The learned counsel for the Bank submits that the Unit is not functioning and closed down. Therefore, the Bank cannot accept the request of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. If the petitioner clears the entire overdue amount, the Bank shall consider the petitioner's application for renewal.

W.P.(C) No.17763 of 2015 2 2.

The petitioner is also make available before the Bank with the details to show that the Unit is functioning.

3. Even if it is functioning, necessarily, the Bank shall take a decision in accordance with relevant regulation.

4. To work out all the reliefs as above, all the coercive steps against the petitioner shall be deferred for a period of two months on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.2.5 lakhs on or before 25.6.2015.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln