IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP.No. 278 of 2009()
1. P.V. THAMPY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD.,
... Respondent
2. DEBTS RECOVERY OFFICER,
3. P.V. JUNJAPPAN,
4. P.V. CHUMMAR,
5. V.G. DIVAKARAN,
6. J. JULIUS SMITH,
For Petitioner :SRI.E.D.GEORGE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :24/03/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J
...........................................
R.P.NO. 278 OF 2009
in WP(C) 36022 of 2008
............................................
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2009
ORDER
Heard. The writ petition was filed in relation to a banking
transaction. The sale was set aside at the instance of the
petitioner, in view of certain deposits made. He was to pay
further amount of Rs.6,00,000/- in a time bound manner and
further amounts that bank may fix. The bank was permitted to
continue to hold charge over the properties over which security
interest was noted. The petitioner wants that condition to be
vacated evidently to enable him to go for private sale. This is
clearly impermissible. Not only that even if the petitioner has a
party for private sale, it is for him to work out that remedy with
the junction of the bank and pay the amounts to the bank and
clear the documents for finalising the deal. I do not find any
ground to review the judgment on the ground of any error
apparent on the face of record or on any other ground for
repayment. The review petition fails and the same is accordingly
dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move
RP 278/2009 2
for enlargement of time, if necessary.
THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
lgk/25/3