High Court Kerala High Court

V. Pocker vs The Chairman on 27 May, 2008

Kerala High Court
V. Pocker vs The Chairman on 27 May, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 15303 of 2008(V)


1. V. POCKER, S/O. MAYIN HAJI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE CHAIRMAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER,

3. THE MANAGER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI (SR.)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/05/2008

 O R D E R
                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                   = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                   =W.P.(C) = =15303 = = = = = =
                     = = = No. = = =OF    2008 - V


                    Dated this the 27th May, 2008.


                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is the Managing Partner of M/s. Sakthi Trading

Company, a partnership firm which had availed of financial

assistance from the respondent bank. When default was committed

the Bank has initiated proceedings before the Debt Recovery

Tribunal and that finally resulted in a notice of demand.

Subsequently the petitioner has made representation requesting for

one time settlement and the writ petition is filed complaining of the

inaction on the part of the Bank in considering the representation so

made. It is stated that Ext.P5 is the application made by the

petitioner.

2. It is seen that notice of demand was issued by the Bank

as early as in July 2007 and Ext.P5, the application for one time

settlement of the liability, was made by the petitioner only in May

2008. If as stated by the petitioner, the same has been received, it

W.P.(C) No.15303 OF 2008-V

– 2 –

is for the bank to consider this representation and pass orders

thereon in accordance with their scheme. This, the 1st respondent

shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 4 weeks of

production of a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent.

3. Writ petition is disposed of as above.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before

the 1st respondent for compliance.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-