Loading...

P.V. Thampy vs South Indian Bank Ltd on 24 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.V. Thampy vs South Indian Bank Ltd on 24 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  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

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information