IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 2047 of 2010()
1. S.PEETHAMBARAN, AGED 60 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. KAVITHAMOL, W/O.PEETHAMBARAN,
Vs
1. SOUTH INDIAN BANK, ALAPPUZHA BRANCH,
... Respondent
2. REGIONAL OFFICE, SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,
3. AUTHORISED OFFICER, SOUTH INDIAN BANK
4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
5. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.K.C.SUDHEER
For Respondent :SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.S.G OF INDI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice B.P.RAY
Dated :22/12/2010
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ.
----------------------------------
W.A. No.2047 of 2010
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 22nd day of December, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandran Nair, J.
This Writ Appeal is filed against the interim order passed
in an I.A. in a disposed of case by the learned Single Judge.
2. Writ Petition was originally disposed of granting
time to the appellants to pay the balance amount. The I.A. was
filed for extension of time. Even though the I.A. was not
allowed, as the amount was already paid, appellants’ case is
that there is still demand from the Bank, which is not payable.
Learned Standing Counsel submitted that account can be
verified and appellants can be given statement of balance
liability, if any. We feel, the matter can be settled by the
Manager himself by verifying the accounts in the presence of
appellants, who will furnish details of payments and other
materials available with them for the Bank to verify and give
WA No.2047/2010
-2-
detailed statement of liability showing amounts debited under
various heads, payments credited and balance, if any,
outstanding in the account. If the appellants have any
surviving grievance, they can approach the DRT in an appeal to
be filed against the securitisation proceedings.
In view of the above, this Writ Appeal is closed.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JUDGE)
jg