Mini Ramankutty v. The Authorised Officer, The Federal Bank Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/28TH KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 34887 of 2015 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

--------------------- MINI RAMANKUTTY AGED 47 YEARS, W/O. LATE G. RAMANKUTTY SUNNY PLACE, FLAT NO. 1206 CHANGAMPUZHA SAMADHI ROAD EDAPPALLY - 24.

BY ADVS.SRI.SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL SRI.A.S.SREEJAN RESPONDENT(S) :

---------------------------- 1.

THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED ZONAL OFFICE, STRESSED ASSET MANAGEMENT CELLS FEDERAL TOWERS, MARINE DRIVE ERNAKULAM - 682 011.

2.

THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., PANANGADU BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANGER- 682 011.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 34887 of 2015 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 9.4.2015 IN WP(C) NO. 10892/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.9.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT FOR A SUM OF RS.1 LAKH ISSUED BY STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE.

EXT.P4 COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF EXHIBITS P2 REPRESENTATION.

EXT.P5 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 9.11.2015 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 34887 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 19th day of November, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is aggrieved by the recovery steps initiated by the respondent bank for realisation of defaulted loan amounts, had approached this Court on an earlier occasion through WP(C) No.10892 of 2015, which was disposed by this Court by Ext.P1 judgment, that granted the petitioner the facility of installments to discharge the outstanding liability to the respondent bank. It is seen that the petitioner did not comply with any of the directions in the said judgment. I am, therefore 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. The writ petition fails and is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /19.11.15