Manoj Kumar , vs Canara Bank,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 31, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1334721

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1334721
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias
Decided On: Jul 31, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/2834/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Manoj Kumar ,

Respondent

Canara Bank,

Excerpt

.....petitioner has failed to comply with the interim order dated 27.1.2023. therefore, the respondents are not willing to extend any instalment :: 3 :: facility to the petitioner. petitioner may be relegated to exhaust his statutory remedy.5. the hon’ble supreme court in south indian bank ltd vs. naveen mathew philip [2023 livelaw (sc) 320], after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicialpronouncements rendered under the act, has categorically declared that high courts shall not, unless in extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the act, in writ proceedings under article 226 of the constitution of india.6. having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that thepetitioner has not complied with the interim orderdated 27.1.2023 passed by this court, i am not inclined to entertain the writ petition by exercising the plenary powers of this court under article 226 of the constitution of india. nonetheless, it will be up to the petitioner to work out his statutory remedies.:: 4 :: resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies, in accordance with law. sd/- c.s.dias judge jes :: 5 :: appendix petitioner’s exhibits: exhibit p1 true copy of the possession notice dated 04.08.2022 exhibit p2 true copy of the notice dated 22.12.2022 exhibit p3 true copy of the representation for one time settlement and also seeking to pay the due amount with in 20 monthly instalments

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1945 PETITIONER: MANOJ KUMAR, AGED 60 YEARS S/O VILSON, CHERIYA CHANASSERY HOUSE, CHERIYA PALLAM THURUTH ROAD, THEKKUMPURAM, KARIMPADAM, CHENDAMANGALAM PO, PIN 683512. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.ANOOP KRISHNA V.A.PRADEEP KUMAR T.V.DEVARAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 CANARA BANK, REP ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513 2 AUTHORISED OFFICER, CANARA BANK, NORTH PARAVU BRANCH, NEAR LAKSHI COLLEGE, NORTH PARAVUR PO, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683513 3 THE BRANCH MANAGER, CANARA BANK, NORTH PARAVUR BRANCH, NEAR LAKSHIM COLLEGE, NORTH PARVUR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683513 BY ADV M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :: 2 ::

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 31st day of July 2023 The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to pay off the overdue amount in instalments and regularise the loan account.

2. This Court by order dated 27.1.2023 has stayed further proceedings subject to the condition that the petitioner remits an amount of Rs.75,000/- within one month.

3. Heard; Sri.Anoop Krishna, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. Sri.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has failed to comply with the interim order dated 27.1.2023. Therefore, the respondents are not willing to extend any instalment :: 3 :: facility to the petitioner. Petitioner may be relegated to exhaust his statutory remedy.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Naveen Mathew Philip [2023 LiveLaw (SC) 320], after adverting to a myriad of earlier judicial

pronouncements rendered under the Act, has categorically declared that High Courts shall not, unless in extra ordinary circumstances, interfere with proceedings initiated under the Act, in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the fact that the

petitioner has not complied with the interim order

dated 27.1.2023 passed by this Court, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition by exercising the plenary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Nonetheless, it will be up to the petitioner to work out his statutory remedies.

:: 4 :: Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies, in accordance with law. sd/- C.S.DIAS JUDGE jes :: 5 :: APPENDIX PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED 04.08.2022 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.12.2022 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FOR ONE TIME SETTLEMENT AND ALSO SEEKING TO PAY THE DUE AMOUNT WITH IN 20 MONTHLY INSTALMENTS

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Manoj Kumar , vs Canara Bank, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias