Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C.R. ABRAHAM, CHOOREPARAMBIL HOUSE versus THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C.R. ABRAHAM, CHOOREPARAMBIL HOUSE v. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE - WP(C) No. 32503 of 2006(T) [2007] RD-KL 1517 (19 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 32503 of 2006(T)

1. C.R. ABRAHAM, CHOOREPARAMBIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE
... Respondent

2. THE SPECIAL SALE OFFICER,

3. THE PEOPLES URBAN CO-OPERATIVE

4. THE BRANCH MANAGER,

For Petitioner :SRI.P.J.MATHEW

For Respondent :SRI.T.A.RAJAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.M.JAMES

Dated :19/01/2007

O R D E R

J.M.JAMES, J.

W.P.(C). 32503/2006 Dated this the 19thday of January, 2007

JUDGMENT

The writ petitioner, having defaulted to pay the amount due to the third respondent, the Urban Co- operative bank, was proceeded against for realisation of the amount due to the bank. The writ petitioner is before this Court praying that the direction of the bank, to remit the entire amount in lump, may be interfered with and also prayed to allow an One Time Settlement scheme.

2. I heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the counsel for the third and fourth respondents. It is brought out by the counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 that One Time Settlement facilities are not available for the Urban Co- operative Banks. However, the counsel submitted that the instalment facilities could be extended. The counsel further submitted that the simple interest, at the rate of 19% as had been fixed by the Co-operative Tribunal, together with an exemption to the legal charges and penal W.P.(C).32503/2006 2 interest would be given reduction to, at the time of calculation of the total amount, due to the third respondent.

3. Considering the submissions made by either side, I direct the writ petitioner to approach the third respondent with a representation praying for instalment facilities of the amount. The third respondent shall hear the petitioner, fix the actual amount due from the petitioner to the third respondent, in accordance with the directions issued by the Co-operative Tribunal and also the submissions made before this Court, as above, within three weeks from the date of filing of the representation by the writ petitioner. The third respondent is directed to grant twelve instalments to the petitioner for remitting the entire amount, that would be fixed on the representation which would be filed by the writ petitioner.

4. The writ petitioner shall remit the instalments without any default, and the first instalment shall be within one month from today. The successive W.P.(C).32503/2006 3 instalments shall continue to be remitted as per the direction of the third respondent. The writ petition is disposed of as above. J.M.JAMES

JUDGE

mrcs


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.