Kerala High Court
WP(C)/10838/2025 of GEORGE KUTTY, Vs AUTHORIZED OFFICER, on 3 April 2025
W.P (C) No.10838/2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 10838 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: 1 GEORGE KUTTY, AGED 51 YEARS S/O. RAJAMMA, ANUGRAHA, THEKKUMOODU, THOTTILKODE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 10838 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
GEORGE KUTTY,
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. RAJAMMA, ANUGRAHA, THEKKUMOODU, THOTTILKODE P.O., THIRUVANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
RAJAMMA,
AGED 78 YEARS
W/O. YOHANAN, ANUGRAHA, THEKKUMOODU, THOTTILKODE P.O., THIRUVANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
BY ADVS.
NITIN SUSEELAN
T.ABY JACOB
ARYAMOL A.T.
RESPONDENT/S:
AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
CANNARA BANK, NEDUMANGAD BRANCH, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN
- 695541
RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR, RAILWAY CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH, ERNAKULAM SOUTH, KERALA, PIN
- 682016
UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 600003
BY ADV ACHUTH KRISHNAN R
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have availed credit facilities from the respondent bank. The 1st petitioner met with an accident leading to initiation of proceedings before the Railway Claims Tribunal. The award of the Railway Claims Tribunal was challenged before this court by filing MFA (RCT) No.19/2024 which was disposed of by judgment dated 10-03-2025 enhancing the compensation awarded to the 1st petitioner from a sum of Rs.25,000/- to Rs.60,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accident.
2. The petitioners have approached this court seeking the following relief:- “To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate action as to accept the fixed deposit remitted by the 2nd respondent and adjust it into the loan account and to regularise the said loan.”
3. The learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that, that apart seeking adjustment of the amount deposited by the Tribunal, the petitioners have not sought for any other reliefs from this court. It is submitted that the loan liability is in excess of Rs.6,00,000/- and if the petitioners want to settle the liability with the bank in some manner, it is for them to approach the bank for filing a representation setting out clearly the scheme for repayment of the loan liability. It is submitted that if any proposal is submitted, the same will be considered by the competent authority.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent bank and considering the limited nature of relief sought for by the petitioners in this writ petition, I am of the opinion that this writ petition can be disposed of by permitting the petitioners to approach the competent authority of the respondent bank with a proposal for settling the liability. If such representation is filed by the petitioners within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the competent authority of the respondent bank shall take a decision on the representation to be submitted by the petitioners and communicate its decision to the petitioners without undue delay. Further coercive steps against the petitioners shall remain suspended till a decision is taken on the proposal which is to be submitted by the petitioners. Writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10838/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN OA 01/2020 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P1 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 17.02.2025 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P2 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/07/2024.IS PRODUCERS HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P3 Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING SHEET OF AVAILED FROM THE SITE OF HIGH COURT MFA (RCT) 19/2024 PENDING BEFORE THIS COURT FOR JUDGMENT IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P4. Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 15-02-2025 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT P5. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF NOTICE OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER DATED 17.02.2025 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE PETITIONER DATED 29-07-2024 Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF AUCTION SALE NOTICE DATED 15-02-2025