Ambili N.V vs State Of Kerala on 4 October, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 2309 of 2007()


1. AMBILI N.V.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHAN V.NAIR

                For Respondent  :SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC,SC,DIST.CO-OP,BANK,KTM

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :04/10/2007

 O R D E R
                      H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
              ...................................................................................
                                  W.A. No. 2309 OF 2007
             ...................................................................................
                           Dated this the 4th October , 2007


                                         J U D G M E N T

H.L. Dattu, C.J.:

A harmless order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No.

18376 of 2007 is the subject matter of this appeal. Admittedly, the

appellant/petitioner in the Writ Petition is a defaulter in the sense that she has

not paid the amounts due to the Bank within the time prescribed.

2. The appellant/petitioner in the Writ Petition had filed a Writ Petition

before this Court inter alia seeking directions to the 2nd respondent-Bank to

allow her to pay off the amount due to the Bank under the One Time

Settlement scheme. The learned counsel who appeared for the Bank had

brought to the notice of this Court that there is no provision to grant the benefit

of One Time Settlement and therefore, it was contended that, the petitioner in

the Writ Petition is not entitled for any of the reliefs sought for in the Writ

Petition.

3. However, the learned single Judge, taking a very lenient view in the

matter has granted some instalments facility to the petitioner to discharge the

entire loan liability to the Bank. This ought not to have been done. But this

court, in exercise of its extra ordinary and discretionary jurisdiction, has

granted some reliefs to the petitioner. Normally, the petitioner should have

W.A. No. 2309 OF 2007

2

satisfied with the instalments facility so granted by the impugned order. But

that order is questioned in this Writ Appeal on the ground that the amount of

instalments so granted, is huge and it is requested in this appeal that the

appellant/petitioner in the Writ Petition may be granted some more instalments

facility to discharge the loan liability of the petitioner in the Writ Petition.

4. In our opinion, such a request can never be entertained or should

not be entertained by this court. In that view of the matter, the Writ Appeal

requires to be rejected and it is rejected.

Ordered accordingly.

H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE.

K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.

lk