Sureshkumar, vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 28, 2022

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1446086

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/1446086
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Sathish Ninan
Decided On: Jan 28, 2022
Case Number: RP/113/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sureshkumar,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....p.o,idukki 685 603. 3 the tahsildar, devikulam taluk, devikulam 685 613. 4 deputy thahasildar,devikulam taluk,devikulam- 685613. 5 village officer, munnar village, munnar-685612. 6 devikulam taluk co-operative agricultural & rural bank ltd no.1136, adimaly, idukki district 685 561. gp bimal k. nath this review petition having come up for admission on 28.01.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following:orderregularisation of the loan account was permitted on payment of the entire overdue amounts with interest and costs in 12 equal monthly instalments to be paid along with the regular emis. by way of the review petition it is pointed out that, the amount payable in this account alone could be approximately rs.2.5 lakhs per month. in the light of the present pandemic, the petitioner seeks for increase in the number of instalments for regularisation which would result in bringing down the quantum payable per month.2. the request is vehemently opposed by sri.p.chandy joseph, the learned counsel for the bank. according to him, the facility presently granted is fair enough and the petitioner is not entitled to seek for any further indulgence.3. it is not in dispute that a further period of almost two years remains for expiry of the term of the facility. in the wake of the present pandemic and the nature of business that is being conducted by the petitioner, i feel that the number of instalments could be re-fixed at 18 instead of 12.4. accordingly it is ordered that, the entire overdue amounts with interest and costs shall bepaid in 18 monthly instalments commencing from 02.02.2022. the judgment sought to be reviewed will stand modified to the above extent. in all other respects the judgment dated 10.01.2022 will stand. review petition disposed of as above. sd/- sathish ninan, judge vdv

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 8TH MAGHA, 1943 RP NO. 113 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30884/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: SURESHKUMAR,AGED 50 YEARS, S/O SADANANDHAN, S N TOURIST HOME, MUNNAR - 685612 RESIDING AT S N SADANAM, POOPANI ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 542.
BY ADV E.A.BIJUMON RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE,KUYILIMALA,PAINAVU P.O,IDUKKI 685 603. 3 THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM 685 613. 4 DEPUTY THAHASILDAR,DEVIKULAM TALUK,DEVIKULAM- 685613. 5 VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNNAR VILLAGE, MUNNAR-685612. 6 DEVIKULAM TALUK CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL BANK LTD NO.1136, ADIMALY, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 561. GP BIMAL K. NATH THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Regularisation of the loan account was permitted on payment of the entire overdue amounts with interest and costs in 12 equal monthly instalments to be paid along with the regular EMIs. By way of the review petition it is pointed out that, the amount payable in this account alone could be approximately Rs.2.5 Lakhs per month. In the light of the present pandemic, the petitioner seeks for increase in the number of instalments for regularisation which would result in bringing down the quantum payable per month.

2. The request is vehemently opposed by Sri.P.Chandy Joseph, the learned counsel for the Bank. According to him, the facility presently granted is fair enough and the petitioner is not entitled to seek for any further indulgence.

3. It is not in dispute that a further period of almost two years remains for expiry of the term of the facility. In the wake of the present pandemic and the nature of business that is being conducted by the petitioner, I feel that the number of instalments could be re-fixed at 18 instead of 12.

4. Accordingly it is ordered that, the entire overdue amounts with interest and costs shall be

paid in 18 monthly instalments commencing from 02.02.2022. The judgment sought to be reviewed will stand modified to the above extent. In all other respects the judgment dated 10.01.2022 will stand. Review Petition disposed of as above. Sd/- Sathish Ninan, Judge vdv

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Sureshkumar, vs State of Kerala, Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Sathish Ninan