High Court Kerala High Court

Ramachandran Nair vs The Deputy Tahsildar on 29 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Ramachandran Nair vs The Deputy Tahsildar on 29 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30123 of 2009(I)


1. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.T.PRADEEP

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :29/07/2010

 O R D E R
              P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
            =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
                 W.P.(C) No. 30123 of 2009
            =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
            Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010

                         JUDGMENT

Petitioner availed a loan of Rs.4,47,000/- from the

respondent Board on 21-4-1997 to start a ‘curry powder

unit’ namely “K.M.P. Curry Powder”, agreeing to repay the

amount by way of instalments as specified. The fact remains

that the repayment could not be effected on time, as

scheduled. After completing the formalities, the respondent

Board proceeded with steps, resorting to remedy under the

Revenue Recovery Act. The petitioner is now before this

Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Board

under the Revenue Recovery Act.

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to direct the

respondents to allow the petitioner to pay off the

outstanding in instalments, after deducting the margin

money, and giving credit to the payments made hither to.

3. The margin money, as pointed out by the petitioner

in the opening paragraph in the writ petition, is only

W.P.(C) No. 30123/2009 2

Rs.1,11,000/- and the second respondent Board has field a

statement giving the facts and figures, where the actual

liability has been shown as Rs.7,16,343/-, making it clear

that the margin money has already been set off. It is also

pointed out that the petitioner would be entitled to have

some other benefits as well, if the amounts were satisfied

before 31-12-209 in a lump sum, resulting in waiver of

Rs.61,030/- towards the penal interest. It is stated that, in

spite of giving intimation to avail the benefit, the same was

ignored by the petitioner and that the respondents are

justified in proceeding against the petitioner, in the above

context.

4. During the course of hearing, learned standing

counsel for the respondent Board fairly brought it to the

notice of this Court that the Government has declared the

benefit of ‘OTS scheme’ again and that the petitioner is very

much entitled to have the benefit till 30-9-2010. It is stated

that, in spite of total liability of the petitioner coming to an

extent of Rs.7,16,343/-, the actual liability to be cleared by

W.P.(C) No. 30123/2009 3

the petitioner availing the benefit of OTS is only

Rs.4,81,543 as on 31-09-2010.

5. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is

permitted to clear the liability under the OTS, on filing the

requisite application in this regard, satisfying the

requirements in terms of the Scheme on or before 30-9-

2010. The coercive steps shall be kept in abeyance for the

time being. It is made clear that if any default is committed

by the petitioner in clearing the liability as above, the

respondent Board will be at liberty to proceed with further

steps for realization of the entire amount in a lump sum.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.

mn.