Davis Antony v. The Chief Manager
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/15TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 22400 of 2014 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONERS :
------------------------
1. DAVIS ANTONY, THEKKEKARA HOUSE, VELUTHOOR P.O., TRICHUR - 680 014.
2. ANNIE DAVIS ALIAS ITTIANNAM DEVIS, W/O.DAVIS ANTONY, THEKKEKARA HOUSE, VELUTHOOR P.O. TRICHUR - 680 014.
3. DIXON DAVIS ANTONY, D/O.DAVIS ANTONY, THEKKEKARA HOUSE, VELUTHOOR P.O. TRICHUR - 680 014.
4. DANI DAVIS, S/O.DAVIS ANTONY, THEKKEKARA HOUSE, VELUTHOOR P.O. TRICHUR - 680 014.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN SRI.S.SUJITH RESPONDENTS :
--------------------------
1. THE CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., SAMS, TRICHUR - 680 001.
2. THE MANAGER, THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, PUZHAKKAL BRANCH, PUZHAKKAL TRICHUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 553.
R1 & R2 BY ADVS. SRI.REJI GEORGE SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA) SRI.UMESH N.PAI SRI.BINOY DAVIS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/-
WP(C).No. 22400 of 2014 (Y) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1.
TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 22.08.2014 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
................................................. W.P.(C) No. 22400 of 2014 (Y) ............................................... Dated this the 6th day of March, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who had availed of an overdraft facility and a housing loan from the 2nd respondent Bank, had approached this Court challenging the action taken by the respondent Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
2. When the matter was taken up today, it was submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank that, the petitioner has already discharged the dues to the respondent Bank, in respect of the overdraft facility, and has paid the amounts required for regularising the housing loan account. In that view of the matter, nothing survives to be decided in the present writ petition, as agreed by counsel for the petitioner Resultantantly, the writ petition is closed as infructuous. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE AMV/07/03/ /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE