IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 1305 of 2009(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.10743/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. K.R.NARAYANAN NAIR, KOIPURATHU HOUSE, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. LAILA N.NAIR, KOIPURATHU HOUSE, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. SMT.K.J.AMMINIKUTTY, AGED AND WIFE OF NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, CHIEF MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, PANDALAM BRANCH. 2. SHRI.DIVAKARAN, AGED AND SON OF NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER IV (K), ZONAL OFFICE, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV.SRI.SATHISH NINAN ADV.SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Cont.Case(C).No.1305 of 2009-S = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT This contempt of court case is filed on the premise that the respondents have failed to comply with the directions issued by this Court on 7.4.2009. The matter relates to a commercial transaction in the banking sector. This is a case where the transaction would have gone into, under the cover of SARFAESI Act. With the passage of time, the parties were to try for a consensus. Obviously, therefore, there is no question of any wilful negligence or disobedience to any direction being made out. The respondents have a filed a statement through their learned counsel which shows that if the petitioner is prepared to pay an amount of Rs.7,30,000/- as against Rs.8,35,961/- as on COC1305/2009 -: 2 :- 1.3.2010, the matter would be treated as closed. This, obviously, would mean, as a necessary corollary, that if the petitioner pays off the amount even earlier, the bank would look into the proportionate adjustments without waiting till 1.3.2010 for closure of the transaction. No further orders called for. This contempt of court case is closed. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/1201