A.S.Nizamudheen vs The District Collector on 1 December, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 9934 of 2006(G)


1. A.S.NIZAMUDHEEN, S/O. SAIDUMUHAMMED,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR, NILAMBUR.

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NILAMBUR.

4. CANARA BANK, NILAMBUR BRANCH,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.P.MUJEEB

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :01/12/2010

 O R D E R
                                S. Siri Jagan, J.
                =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                         W.P(C) No. 9934 of 2006
                =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
              Dated this, the 1st day of December, 2010.

                               J U D G M E N T

The petitioner availed of a loan from the 4th respondent Bank.

The petitioner did not repay the same. Proceedings were initiated by

the 4th respondent for sale of the properties mortgaged. The sale is

already over. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the

following relief:

“Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 to keep all the
proceedings for the confirmation of the sale of the property owned
by the petitioner comprised in survey no. 224/11 of Nilambur
village in abeyance for a period of 3 months.”

2. At the time of admission, this Court passed the following

order on 31.3.2006:

“Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all that the
petitioner requires is three months’ time to pay off the
outstandings. Accordingly, as a last chance, recovery proceedings
against the petitioner shall stand deferred for three months on
condition that he deposits the entire amount on or before
15.6.2006. It is clarified that no further extension of time will be
granted.”

In view of that order, the petitioner is not entitled to any further

reliefs in the matter. Admittedly, even within the time granted, the

petitioner did not pay the amount. More than 4 years have elapsed

since then. The petitioner has not paid the amounts due. The

petitioner is, therefore, not entitled to any further indulgence by this

Court in the matter.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/