IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2009 / 22ND POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 36927 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.K.RAVIKUMAR, RAMANS, AMRITHA NAGAR JUNCTION, KAIMANAM, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 18. BY ADV. SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, CO-BANK TOWERS, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, REGIONAL OFFICE, OVER BRIDGE JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, POOJAPPURA BRANCH, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN,SC,K.S.CO-OP BANK FOR R1, 2 & 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 36927 OF 2008-U ----------------------------------------- Dated 12th January, 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner has availed a loan from the Poojappura Branch of the 1st respondent Kerala State Co-operative Bank Limited. He is in default. The Bank has taken coercive steps to recover the amount. So, he has filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs: “(i) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to furnish the statement of accounts of the loan availed by the petitioner from the 3rd respondent. (ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to grant instalment facility to the petitioner for repaying the arrears of loan. (iii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to waive interest, penal interest and other charges levied upon the petitioner and grant One Time Settlement facility to the petitioner to pay the loan arrears.” 2. We note that the dispute between the petitioner and the 1st WPC 36927/08 2 respondent Bank is concerning a commercial transaction. So, in that dispute this Court cannot interfere, invoking its writ jurisdiction. But, the learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent submits that if the petitioner approaches the 3rd respondent Branch Manger of the Bank, the branch will furnish a statement of accounts in respect of the petitioner's loan account within two weeks from today. 3. The second prayer cannot be granted for the reason that the petitioner has no legal right to get instalment facility and the Bank, even assuming it is amenable to our writ jurisdiction, has no corresponding duty to him in this regard. The 3rd prayer cannot be granted, as the period of one- time settlement was already over on 31.3.2008. Subject to the direction on the 1st relief, the Writ Petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE. Nm/