IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27989 of 2010(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MANILAL.V.N, VETTIKATTUTHARAYIL, ELANTHUR PO, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI SRI.SANTHOSH P.ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE BANK OF INDIA KOZHENCHERRY BRANCH, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER PIN 689 645 2. THE TAHSILDAR REVENUE RECOVERY, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA PIN 689 645 . BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN FOR R2 SRI.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR - SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 27989 of 2010-W ---------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010. J U D G M E N T Petitioner is challenging the revenue recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to notices issued under Exts.P6 to P11. The petitioner had availed three loans from the first respondent Bank for agricultural purpose, purchase of vehicle, and for commercial purpose. Consequent to the default committed in repayment of the amounts due, recovery steps under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act was initiated at the behest of the first respondent. Contention of the petitioner is that as evidenced from Ext.P5, the Bank had permitted settlement of the account, after giving considerable waiver in the matter of interest as well as other penal charges. But it is evident that the petitioner had even failed to comply with the conditions stipulated in Ext.P5. It is also contended that even after receipt of notice of recovery, the petitioner had effected some payments. 2. Eventhough various contentions are raised, submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the petitioner is W.P(C) No. 27989 of 2010-W 2 ready and willing to pay off the entire liability within a reasonable time if permitted to make payments in instalments. Learned standing counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that the total amount outstanding will be more than Rs.5,00,000/- and that the loan accounts are in chronic default. 3. Having considered facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that interference on merits of the matter is not at all warranted, since the petitioner could not raise any legally tenable contentions against the recovery steps. However, on the totality of the circumstances, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to pay off the entire liability within a reasonable time in instalments. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of restraining the respondents from proceeding with further coercive steps pursuant to Exts.P6 to P11 notices, provided the petitioner remits the entire amount due, including interest accruing in future as well as expenses if any due, in 6 (six) equal monthly instalments, starting from 15.10.2010 and on or before 15th day of the succeeding months. 5. It is made clear that on the event of default in payment of any of the instalments as stipulated above, the respondents will W.P(C) No. 27989 of 2010-W 3 be free to proceed with further steps permissible under law. It is also made clear that the above relief is granted subject to the condition that the petitioner is precluded from raising any subsequent challenge against such proceedings, either before this Court or before any other forum. 6. It is further made clear that the conditions stipulated for payments as above will not stand in the way of the petitioner approaching the first respondent Bank seeking waiver of the interest/penal interest/expenses and the first respondent Bank is favourably considering the same. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab W.P(C) No. 27989 of 2010-W 4