High Court Kerala High Court

A.K.Mohanan vs Union Bank Of India on 26 February, 2008

Kerala High Court
A.K.Mohanan vs Union Bank Of India on 26 February, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 5617 of 2008(R)


1. A.K.MOHANAN,S/O.KUTTY, AREEKKATTU HOUSE
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
                       ...       Respondent

2. ZONAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE

3. BRANCH MANAGER,UNION BANK OF INDIA

                For Petitioner  :SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :26/02/2008

 O R D E R
                           ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                          ===============

                     W.P.(C) NO. 5617 OF 2008 R

                    ====================


            Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008


                                J U D G M E N T

In this writ petition, the request of the petitioner is for a

direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P5, where he has

sought for the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme. It is

seen that when proceedings were initiated against the petitioner

under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, he had filed a writ

petition in this court as WP(C) No.25722/07 and that writ petition

was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment.

2. In that judgment, he was directed to make an initial

payment of Rs.1.25 lakhs and to pay the balance in four equal

monthly instalments. It is submitted by the counsel for the Bank

that though the petitioner has made the initial payment, the

instalments have been completely defaulted. In view of this, I

am satisfied that the petitioner does not deserve an order from

WPC 5617/08

:2 :

this court as sought for in this writ petition.

3. Inspite of the fact that the Bank has no scheme for

OTS, the learned counsel for the Bank submits that if the

petitioner clears atleast three of the defaulted instalments, the

Bank is still willing to consider the request made by the petitioner

in Ext.P5 sympathetically.

4. Taking into account the submissions made as above, I

direct that if the petitioner remits three out of the 4 monthly

instalments directed to be paid in Ext.P2 within a period of two

weeks from today, the Bank shall consider Ext.P5 representation

made by the petitioner.

5. A decision on Ext.P5 shall thereafter be communicated

to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within

three weeks thereafter and depending on the decision so

communicated, the balance amount will be paid by the petitioner.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.

Rp