High Court Kerala High Court

M/S Geo Franc Enterprises vs The Central Bank Of India on 17 September, 2007

Kerala High Court
M/S Geo Franc Enterprises vs The Central Bank Of India on 17 September, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 27530 of 2007(U)


1. M/S GEO FRANC ENTERPRISES,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MR. GEORGE AUGUSTINE, AGED 51 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. THE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SENIOR MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :17/09/2007

 O R D E R
                   ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

            = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
              W.P.(C) No. 27530 OF 2007 B
            = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

          Dated this the 17th September, 2007

                    J U D G M E N T

The proceedings that led to the filing of the writ

petition are initiated under the provisions of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It is

now submitted that as per Ext. P18 an amount of

Rs.53.10 lakhs plus interest is due from the

petitioner.

2. Petitioner now submits that coercive action is

being initiated against the mortgaged properties. At

the time of hearing of this writ petition, learned

counsel for the petitioner made an offer to remit one

third of the amount mentioned in Ext. P18. I heard the

learned counsel for the respondent-Bank also.

3. In the facts of this case, I dispose of this

writ petition directing that the petitioner would make

remittance of one third of the amount mentioned in

Ext. P18 within six weeks from today in which case

further proceedings pursuant to Ext. P1 shall not be

WPC No. 27530/07 -2-

continued. Thereafter the petitioner shall make a

representation to the 1st respondent for one time

settlement in which case the representation of the

petitioner shall be considered and orders passed

thereon. Until then all further proceedings pursuant

to Ext. P1 shall be kept in abeyance.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-