High Court Kerala High Court

Rajesh vs Vijaya Bank on 31 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Rajesh vs Vijaya Bank on 31 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 23169 of 2008(G)


1. RAJESH, 40 YEARS, S/O.SREENIVASAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. VIJAYA BANK, ALAPPUZHA BRANCH
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNIL J.CHAKKALACKAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :31/07/2008

 O R D E R
                             S. Siri Jagan, J.
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                      W. P (C) No. 23169 of 2008
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                   Dated this, the 31st    July, 2008.

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner challenges proceedings under the Securitisation

and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security

Interest Act, 2002 initiated by the respondent for recovery of loan

amounts due from the petitioner to the Bank. However, the petitioner

does not now dispute the liability to pay or the quantum. The

petitioner only seeks permission to pay off the amounts in instalments.

2. This is opposed by the standing counsel for the Bank.

However, taking a lenient view, I feel that the petitioner can be

permitted to pay off the amounts in instalments. Accordingly, I

dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:

The petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs 2.5 lakhs within one

month. The balance amount shall be paid in eight equal monthly

instalments starting from the first working day of October, 2008.

Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of

every succeeding month. If the petitioner complies with the above

directions strictly, further recovery proceedings shall be kept in

abeyance. However, if the petitioner fails to pay either the Rs. 2.5

lakhs or any of the subsequent instalment, it would be open to the

respondent to continue proceedings as now initiated, without having

to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/

[True copy]

P.S to Judge.