M.V.Usha v. The Canara Bank
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR SATURDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/30TH KARTHIKA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35229 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
---------------------- M.V.USHA, AGED 41 YEARS, W/O.M.MANIKANDAN, RESIDING ATY CHETTATHARA, PEZHUNGARA, PALAKKAD.
BY ADVS.SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN SMT.P.G.BABITHA RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------- 1.
THE CANARA BANK, BIG BAZAR BRANCH, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, PIN-678101. 2.
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, THE CANARA BANK LTD., BIG BAZAR BRANCH, PALAKKAD-678101.
BY SRI.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 35229 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P-1:
TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR OBTAINING MEDICAL CERTIFICATE FOR APPLYING FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR TREATMENT EXT.P-2:
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3/5/11 IN WPC.12821/11 EXT.P-3:
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE BANK ACKNOWLEDGING PAYMENT OF AMOUNTS.
EXT.P-4:
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 13(4) FOR THE SARFASI ACT DATED 14/10/15 EXT.P-5:
TRUE COPY OF THE E-AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 14/10/15 ISSUED BY THE R2.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.
/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.35229 OF 2015 (C) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of November, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, who is aggrieved by the steps taken by the respondent bank, for recovery of the defaulted loan amounts, had already approached this Court on an earlier occasion through W.P.(C). No.12821/2011. On that occasion, this Court, by Ext.P2 judgment had granted permission to the petitioner to pay the overdue amount in four equal monthly installments. It is not in dispute that the petitioner did not comply with the directions in Ext.P2 judgment. Under the said circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails, and is accordingly dismissed.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/21/11/15