IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 34144 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O.RAMATHARAKAN, PARACKAL HOUSE, PERINGOD, PARASSERY P.O.,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. BRANCH MANAGER,UNION BANK OF INDIA, KAIKATTY BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, NRI BRANCH, PB NO 118. THERADAPPUZHA BUILDING R.S.ROAD, PALAKKAD 678 001. BY ADV. SRI. A.S.P.KURUP, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.34144 of 2008-M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT In so far as this writ petition is concerned, the rights and liabilities of the parties in relation to the transaction in question stand concluded by Ext.P5 judgment of this Court and it is impermissible for a separate writ being issued merely because the petitioner had not obeyed the conditions imposed by this Court in the said judgment. It is stated by the learned counsel for the bank that in spite of the instalment facility granted in Ext.P5 judgment, not a pie was paid. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that all that the petitioner requires is two weeks' time. It is not permissible to issue a fresh writ when the petitioner could have at least sought for variation of the terms of Ext.P5. By now even that exercise cannot be had WP(C)34144/08 -: 2 :- since the petitioner had permitted the time fixed by Ext.P5 to run out. Under such circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner requesting the bank to defer action by two weeks. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/191108