SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13224

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.M.JOSEPH, J
K.M.HUSSAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR

J U D G M E N T

I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel and learned Government Pleader.

2. Petitioner availed loan and not repaid. Recovery steps have been taken. The petitioner has produced Exts.P22 and P23. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will pay the amount demanded in Ext.P23. It is submitted that the petitioner is also prepared to pay the amount which, according to the respondent, is further due by way of interest and upon payment of the amount, the documents may be released to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner will also file an application for availing the benefit under the OTS and that also may be considered.

3. Learned counsel for the Board submits that the Board has no serious objection.

4. In such circumstances, writ petition is disposed of as follows.

WPC.7910/06 Upon the petitioner remitting the amount due as per Ext.P23 and also paying the further amount demanded under protest within two weeks, the originals of the documents under the Equitable Mortgage will be returned to the petitioner. It is also made clear that if the petitioner makes an application for getting the benefit of OTS wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top