IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 RP.No. 713 of 2010 --------------------------- (JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.7305/2010 DTD. 07/04/2010 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT) ................ REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------------- JAISON ISSAC, S/O.ISSAC KOCHOLICKAL HOUSE, KANJIRAM KAVALA MELUKAVU P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.CHACKO, SRI. C.M. CHARISMA, SRI. N.A. SHAFEEK, SRI. M.S. UNNIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA, KARUMANNU BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN -686 001. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA, KARUMANNU BRANCH, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN- 686 001. R1 & R2 BY SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, S.C. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- R.P.No.713 of 2010 in W.P(C) No.7305 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010. O R D E R This review petition has been filed by the petitioner stating that there is an apparent error in the verdict passed by this Court on 7.4.2010, whereby the matter was disposed of directing the petitioner to clear the overdue amount as specified and to have the loan account regularized. It is contended by the review petitioner that the overdue amount in respect of the defaulted instalments was recorded in para 3 of the above judgment as 'Rs.3.39 lakhs' plus further expenses, if any, which was on the basis of the submission made by the learned counsel for the Bank. The learned counsel submits that the total 'overdue' amount as conveyed by the Bank by Annexure A1 dated 17.7.2010 in reply to the query made by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, is only Rs.99,267/- as on 30.6.2010 and this being the position, the matter requires to be reconsidered. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits that the mistake of course happened at the hands of the respondent, R.P.No.713 of 2010 2 which however is stated as regretted. The learned counsel also submits on the basis of the written instruction obtained subsequently, that the actual 'overdue' amount was around Rs.1 lakh as in June 2010, as pointed out in 'Annexure A1' intimation given by the Bank. It is also conceded that the petitioner, of course has satisfied a portion of the said liability in the meanwhile and that only the balance amount is liable to be cleared, to have the loan account regularized. 3. In the above circumstances, the review petitioner is permitted to clear the remaining 'overdue' amount as shown in Annexure A1 with subsequent interest and expenses if any, which shall be done within one month, on which event the loan account will stand regularized. The petitioner shall continue to effect the regular EMIs as well without fail and the default clause incorporated in the judgment will continue. The Review Petition is disposed of effecting appropriate modifications to the judgment as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab