IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 306 of 2010(K)
1. T.JOHN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION,
... Respondent
2. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY,
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.A.J.JOSE(AEDAIODI)
For Respondent :SRI.M.M.SAYED MUHAMMED, SC, KFC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
Dated :02/02/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P.(C)No. 306 OF 2010
.........................................................................
Dated this the 2nd February, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is challenging the coercive steps taken by
the respondent Bank for realization of the amount due under a
loan transaction.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
challenge raised against the steps taken by the respondents is
not intended to be proceeded with any further, provided the
petitioner is given some breathing time to clear the entire
liability. It is also stated that the default was only because of
some unforeseen circumstances, resulting certain downfall in the
business and that every earnest effort is being made to
discharge the liability. It is also submitted that it is with this
intent that the petitioner has approached the first respondent
and filed Ext. P4 representation, assuring that the entire
outstanding liability will be cleared within six months. It is
W.P.(C)No. 306 OF 2010
2
further stated that, to prove his bonafides, the petitioner will
continue to effect payment of interest in respect of the due
amount to be satisfied every month.
3. Heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
first respondent-Kerala Financial Corporation, who submits with
reference to the statement filed on behalf of the said respondent
that there is absolutely no merit or bonafides on the part of the
petitioner and that he was not at all eager in discharging the
liability at any point of time . It is also brought to the notice of
this Court that the petitioner has remitted only about Rs. One
lakh, whereas the outstanding liability as on 01.01.2010 is nearly
Rs.24.44 lakhs. The learned Standing Counsel also submits that
Ext.P4 representation can be considered, only if the petitioner
proves his bonafides by effecting some substantial payments.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner
is directed to remit a sum of Rs. Three lakhs within three
weeks, on which event , the first respondent shall consider Ext.P4
and pass appropriate orders thereon, after giving an opportunity
of hearing to the petitioner . Subject to the above, all further
W.P.(C)No. 306 OF 2010
3
recovery proceedings being pursued against the petitioner shall
be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that in the event of non-
compliance of the direction given as above, the respondents will
be free to proceed with appropriate steps, by continuing Ext.P2
proceedings from the stage where it stands now.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
lk