Eldhose K Jose v. Bank Of Baroda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/28TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 30926 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- ELDHOSE K JOSE, S/O.JOSE, KOTTAYIL HOUSE, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU PO, THIRSSUR REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY, HOLDER PAULOSE JOSE .K, S/O.JOSE, KOTTAYIL HOUSE, MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU PO TRISSUR.

BY ADV. SMT.VIJAYAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------ BANK OF BARODA, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER, MANNUTHY BRANCH, 1ST FLOOR ATLAS BUILDING, MARKET ROAD, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR, PALAYAM BRANCH.

BY SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

PJ

WP(C).No. 30926 of 2015 (M) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1THE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 1.7.2015 EXEUCTED BY THE PETITONER IN FAVOUR OF PAULOSE JOSE .K P2THE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 15.11.2014 TO SURRENDER THE POSSESSION P3THE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.31968/14 DATED 10.12.2014 BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT P4THE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BANK BY THE DEPOSITOR P5THE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ON BEHALF OF THE PETITONER RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 30926 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 20th day of October, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who had availed of a loan from the respondent bank, and defaulted in repayment of the same, has approached this court aggrieved by the steps taken by the respondent bank to recover the defaulted loan amounts. It is seen from a perusal of the writ petition that the petitioner had already approached this Court on an earlier occasion through WP(C)No.31968 of 2014 when steps were taken against him by the respondent bank to recover the then defaulted loan amounts. On that occasion, this Court by Ext.P3 judgment, permitted the petitioner to pay the defaulted amounts in installments as a condition for stay of recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the respondent bank. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did not comply with the directions of this Court in Ext.P3 judgment. Under the said circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot aspire for any discretionary relief from this Court, in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Resultantly, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /20.10.15