Girija Prakasan vs State Bank Of Travancore on 4 August, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21929 of 2009(I)


1. GIRIJA PRAKASAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :04/08/2009

 O R D E R
                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
               ........................................................................
                    W.P.(C) No. 21929 OF 2009
               .........................................................................
                      Dated this the              4th August, 2009


                                   J U D G M E N T

The petitioner along with her husband had availed a housing

loan of Rs. 2.6 lakhs from the respondent Bank in the year 2006. But

the loan could not be repaid on time as scheduled, which made the

respondent Bank to proceed with further steps after declaring the

account as ‘NPA’, which in turn is sought to be intercepted in the

present Writ Petition.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

default was never wilful or deliberate, but for some unforeseen

circumstances. It is stated that the petitioner is making every earnest

effort to see that the defaulted arrears are cleared at the earliest

opportunity and the only prayer is that the loan account may be

regularised at the hands of the respondent Bank.

3. Heard the learned Counsel for the respondent Bank, who

submits, on instruction, that as on 31.07.2009, a sum of Rs. 60279/-

with subsequent interest and cost is due, for regularisation of the loan

account.

4. Considering the persuasive submission made by the learned

W.P.(C) No. 21929 OF 2009
2

Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not have any

challenge against the steps taken by the respondent Bank, as on date,

the petitioner is permitted to clear the outstanding liability towards

the defaulted E.M.Is, by way of three equal monthly installments, the

first of which shall be effected on or before 25.08.2009, to be

followed by remaining installments to be effected on or before the 25th

of the succeeding months. This will be in addition to the liability of the

petitioner to effect the regular E.M.Is as well. Subject to the above, all

coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall

stand deferred. It is further made clear that if any default is

committed by the petitioner in clearing the liability towards defaulted

arrears as above or if any two consecutive defaults are resulted in

remitting the regular E.M.Is, the respondent Bank will be at liberty to

proceed with further steps from the stage where it stands now, for

realisation of the entire amount in a lump sum.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

lk