High Court Kerala High Court

Pennama Sebastian vs Kadanad Co-Operative Society Ltd on 14 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
Pennama Sebastian vs Kadanad Co-Operative Society Ltd on 14 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19636 of 2009(Y)


1. PENNAMA SEBASTIAN, AGED 50 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KADANAD CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.
                       ...       Respondent

2. SPECIAL SALES OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.F.SEBASTIAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/07/2009

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                   -------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No.19636 of 2009
             ---------------------------------
               Dated, this the 14th day of July, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

The petitioner submits that her deceased husband had availed

of a loan of Rs.2 lakhs, and she had availed of a loan of Rs.1 lakh

from the respondent Bank way back in 1994. Default was

committed. Arbitration proceedings were initiated and awards have

been rendered in favour of the 1st respondent. These awards were

not challenged and have become final. The petitioner also admits

that, on an earlier occasion, in a writ petition filed by the petitioner,

the number of which is not disclosed, this Court granted instalment

facility, and that direction also was not complied with. Now the

Bank has issued Exts.P1 & P2 sale notices proposing to sell the plot

of 1.35 acres of land and another plot of 85 cents of land

mortgaged for availing of the above loans, for realising an amount

of Rs.7,07,205/ and Rs.3,45,929/- respectively. It is at this stage,

the writ petition is filed.

2. One of the contentions raised is that the interest levied

WP(C) No.19636/2009
-2-

on the loans is in contrary to the directions of the Reserve Bank of

India. The other is regarding the non-compliance of KCS Rules.

3. In my view, none of these submissions carry any weight

at this distance of time. The awards have become final, and

therefore, these contentions cannot be appreciated. That apart this

Court will not be justified in granting instalment facility to the

petitioner for the reason that on a previous occasion, instalment

facility was granted to the petiitoner, which also has not been

complied with.

For these reasons, I am not incliened to entertain the writ

petition.

Therefore, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg