IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP No. 19026 of 1999(M)
1. E.V.VARGHESE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :14/12/2007
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
-----------------------------------
O.P. No. 19026 of 1999
-------------------------
Dated, this the 14th day of December, 2007
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is, in this Court a second round, challenging
recovery proceedings initiated for recovery of arrears of loan availed
by a company of which the petitioner was a guarantor for Rs.3.6
lakhs. It is seen from Ext.P4 judgment that petitioner’s claim was
allowed by this Court and this Court directed that recovery against
petitioner should be limited to Rs.3.6 lakhs with interest thereon
based on guarantee furnished by petitioner. Petitioner’s
apprehension, that full amount of above Rs.2.2 crores is proposed
to be recovered from petitioner, is absolutely out of place and if
there is any such move, it is for the petitioner to move contempt of
court case in this Court, as such proposal will be in violation of
Ext.P4 judgment. It is to be noted that petitioner has not come
forward with clean hands to this Court, because petitioner has not
deposited Rs.3.6 lakhs with interest thereon in terms of Ext.P4
judgment, which was issued 8 years back. There is no bona fides in
the original petition filed. This original petition is, therefore,
disposed of with direction to the petitioner to immediately deposit
Rs.3.6 lakhs with interest thereon from the date of demand till date
O.P.NO. 19026/1999
-2-
of payment before the District Collector within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing
which, respondents can proceed not only for recovery but also for
initiating contempt of court case against the petitioner before this
Court for violation of above direction. Even though, petitioner has
pleaded limitation, I do not think petitioner is entitled to plead
limitation because the issue is covered by resjudicata by virtue of
Ext.P4 judgment, whereunder this Court held that petitioner is liable
to pay Rs.3.6 lakhs with interest thereon.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.)
jg