IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 14162 of 2011(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ ROHINI SHENOY, W/O.SURENDRA SHENOY, SHANTHA VIHAR, MANGALPADY VILLAGE, MANGALPADY P.O., KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. JAYARAMA SHENOY, S/O.SURENDRA SHENOY, SHANTHA VIHAR, MANGALPADY P.O., KASARAGOD-671 121. 2. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, AIG HOME FINANCE LTD, (FORMERLY WEIZMANN HOMES LTD), M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE- 560 001. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD-671 121. R2 BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH THOMAS R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.14162/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P2 COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR REMITTING THE TAX IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY. P3 COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE OF THE SAID PROPERTY. P4 COPY OF THE LOCATION CERTIFICATE OF THE PROPERTY AND SKETCH. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.14162 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the mother of the 1st respondent, who defaulted repayment of loan amounts due from him to the 2nd respondent financial institution. The petitioner's contention is that the property proceeded against belongs to the petitioner and therefore, for the liability of the 1st respondent, though her son's, her property cannot be proceeded against. 2. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the statement is incorrect. He points out that the 1st respondent had earlier filed W.P.(C)No.36791/2010, in which he did not dispute the ownership of the property and ultimately the writ petition was dismissed. It is further submitted that it is after making sure through the concerned village office that the property is that of the 1st respondent proceedings were initiated. 3. I am not inclined to go into the disputed questions since to save the property and her son, the petitioner is prepared to pay the amounts in instalments. W.P.(C)No.14162/11 2 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner or her son to pay the amounts in ten equal monthly instalments starting from 1.8.2011. Every subsequent instalment shall be paid on the first working day of every succeeding month. If the petitioner pays the instalments without default on due dates, further proceedings in the recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. However, if the petitioner commits default in payment of any of the instalments, it would be open to respondents 2 and 3 to continue proceedings as now initiated without having to issue any fresh notice or proceedings in that regard. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(C)No.14162/11 3 W.P.(C)No.14162/11 4