IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15145 of 2011(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JEROME.M.S,S/O.M.K.SEBASTIAN,AGED 39 YEARS,BUSINESS,R/AT LOVE DALE,THOTTAKATTUKARA, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR. P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683 101. 2. THE DEPUTY THAHASILDAR,REVENUE RECOVERY, ALUVA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ,PIN 683 101. 3. THE MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA, ERNAKULAM HOUSING FINANCE AND PERSONAL BANKING BRANCH, KALOOR,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN 682 018. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15145 of 2011(P) APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE SAID DEMAND NOTICE DATED 1.4.11 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.30.5.11 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :- NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15145 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner availed of a loan from the 3rd respondent bank. He committed default in repayment of the loan amounts. Therefore, the bank initiated revenue recovery proceedings through respondents 1 and 2, which is under challenge in this writ petition. This Court on 7.6.2011 passed the following interim order: “SC for 3rd respondent is directed to get instructions and to file statement, if so advised. Meanwhile, coercive steps of recovery initiated pursuant to Ext.P1 notice shall be kept in abeyance subject to condition of the petitioner remitting a sum of Rs.50,000/- on or before 30-6-11.” 2. The learned counsel for the bank submits that the petitioner has not complied with the interim order. In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction vested in it to come to the assistance of the petitioner, who does not even comply with the interim order of this Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd