IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 19 of 2009() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30465/2008 Dated 04/11/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------- P.V.VASUDEVAN, M/S.GALAXY FOAM PRODUCTS, BUILDING NO.560, KODOM BELUR PANCHAYAT, THAYANNUR.P.O, KASARAGODE DIST. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE KASARAGODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KASARAGODE, REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 2. THE SALE OFFICER/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, KASARAGODE DISTRICT DIST.CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KASARAGODE. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.A. NO: 19 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th January, 2009. JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. The petitioner is indebted to the first respondent-bank. The bank has already obtained Ext.P1 award against him and others. In execution of that award the sale officer has taken steps to sell the properties of the petitioner and others. He along with his wife approached this Court seeking the benefit of one time settlement by filing W.P(C) 9624/2008. This Court disposed of that writ petition giving instalment facility to pay the amounts due to the bank. The appellant changed his counsel and through another counsel the present writ petition was filed suppressing the factum of filing the earlier writ petition. Learned Judge on noticing this suppression of the filing of earlier writ petition dismissed the present writ petition. Undaunted, the appellant again changed his counsel and this appeal is attempted. The learned Single Judge has declined to exercise jurisdiction in favour of the appellant for the reason that he has suppressed material facts. Unless the said exercise of discretion is shown to be perverse, the appellate court W.A.19/2009 2 cannot interfere with the same in an appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act. Going by the grounds raised we find that there are no materials to enter a finding that the learned Single Judge has exercised the discretion vested in him in a perverse manner. Accordingly the writ appeal is dismissed. But the dismissal of the writ appeal will not prejudice the right of the appellant to move the bank to settle the loan account. But he will not be entitled to approach this Court by filing another writ petition for the relief for which he has approached the Bank. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: