High Court Kerala High Court

S.Sajilal vs Canara Bank on 19 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
S.Sajilal vs Canara Bank on 19 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 33295 of 2007(L)


1. S.SAJILAL, ANANDABHAVAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. CANARA BANK, CIRCLE OFFICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CANARA BANK,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :19/11/2007

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                   ===================
                   W.P.(C)NO. 33295 OF 2007 L
                   ===================

           Dated this the 19th day of November, 2007


                           J U D G M E N T

Writ petitioner is a compulsorily retired employee of the

respondent Bank. During his service, he had incurred certain

liabilities and on the default in repayment resulted in proceedings

under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets

and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and that is

sought to be challenged in this writ petition.

2. At the time when the writ petition came up initially for

orders, it was submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner that

although he had challenged his dismissal, which was later on

converted into compulsory retirement by filing writ petition in this

court as WP(C) No.33854/06, without prejudice to his

contentions, he is agreeable to the bank adjusting the amounts

that are due to him. In view of the submission so made, the case

was adjourned for enabling the standing counsel to the Bank to

get instructions in the matter and that is how the case came up

again today.

WPC No.33295/07
: 2 :

2. Today, the standing counsel for the Bank submits that

credit has been given to payments already made. It is pointed

out that towards his Provident Fund, the amount due is

Rs.44,962.99/- and that his total liability to the Bank is around

Rs.6.5 lakhs. Counsel for the petitioner submits that without

prejudice to his contentions in the other writ petition, he is

agreeable for the bank to adjust the Provident Fund dues as well

and he pleads that he may be given a breathing time to raise

funds to liquidate the balance liability.

3. After hearing both sides, in view of the submissions

that are made as above, I dispose of this writ petition with the

following directions;

(i) That without prejudice to the contentions raised by the

petitioner in WP(C) No.33854/06, the Bank will be free to

appropriate the PF dues of the petitioner towards his liability in

the housing loan.

(ii) The Bank will also be entitled to make similar

appropriation, if any other amount is also due to the petitioner’s

credit.

WPC No.33295/07
: 3 :

(iii) The proceedings initiated against the petitioner will be

deferred till 15th February, 2008 in order to enable the petitioner

to raise funds for liquidating the liability that is outstanding in his

housing loan account.

(iv) If the petitioner is not in a position to liquidate the

liability within the time as permitted above, it will be open to the

Bank to continue action that it has initiated.

(v) In the meantime, if there is any one time settlement

or other beneficiary scheme in vogue, it will be open to the

petitioner to apply for the benefit of the same.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp