IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2011 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 5951 of 2011(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. ULLAS SEBASTIAN, AMBATTU HOUSE,KADAPATTOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM 2. M.J.SEBASTIAN, MYLADOOR, KODUMPIDY P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL, SRI.N.NAGARESH, SRI.BINU PAUL, SRI.T.V.VINU, SRI.SHINE MATHEWS(VADAKKEKARA). RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY OFFICE, PALA-686 575. 2. CANARA BANK REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, PALA BRANCH, PALA-686 575. R2 BY ADV. SRI. PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN,SC, CANARA BANK THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.5951/2011 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD. 21/01/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE MASTER CIRCULAR LENDING TO PRIORITY SECTOR GUIDELINE ISSUED BY THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA DTD. 20/07/2004. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5951 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T Proceedings initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act for realisation of arrears in the bank loan account, is challenged in this writ petition. In view of availability of the effective alternative remedy as well as in view of the fact that there is no tenable challenge against the liability, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, it is made clear that all the contentions raised in this writ petition with respect to sustainability of the proceedings, is left open for agitation before the appropriate forum. 2. It is noticed that, an interim stay was granted against the recovery steps subject to condition of the petitioners remitting a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only), within 3 weeks from 28.2.2011. It is conceded that the stipulation has not been complied with, till date. 3. Under such circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition any further. However, it will be 2 W.P.(C).No.5951 of 2011 left open to the petitioners to approach the 2nd respondent Bank seeking settlement of the account, either under instalment payment or through 'one time settlement scheme'. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, Judge ami/